)alifori 
gional 
cility 


.-jj 


THE  GIFT  OF 

MAY  TREAT  MORRISON 

IN  MEMORY  OF 

ALEXANDER  F  MORRISON 


THE 


English  Grammar 


WILLIAM  COBBETT 


IN   A    SERIES  OF   LETTERS   ADDRESSED  TO  HIS  SON 


WITH  NOTES 

BY 

ROBERT   WATERS 

AUTHOK  or  A  "  LIFE  OF    WILLIAM   COBBKTT,"    "  8HAKESPEARB   AS  PORTBAYED  BY 
HIMSELF,"  AND  "GENIUS  AND  CULTUBB." 


TENTH  EDITION. 


NEW  YORK. 
PETER  ECKLER,  PUBLISHER, 

lOOI.  ,   -J- 


COPYRIGHT. 


Tliti  ETCKLER  PrEJJ 
>3o  rui  TON  JT. 

New  York.^ 


//  // 


EDITOR'S    PREFACE. 

UB.    RIOHAKD    GRANT    WHITe's    VIEWS;    AND    SOME    OTHER    VTEWS. 

Among  I'ecent  writers  on  language,  there  is  perhaps 
1  not  one  who  has  written  more  wisely,  or  exhibited  a  finer 
^  perception  of  the  true  means  of  acquii-ing  the  power  of 
f*  expression,  than  Mr.  Richard  Grant  White.  His  two 
works,  "  Words  and  their  Uses  "  and  "  Every-day  English," 
J  are  marvelously  interesting  and  full  of  sound,  wholesome 
0^  instruction.  These  books  will,  by  any  one  xminf  ormed  of 
his  novel  vievrs,  be  read  with  sm-prise  and  even  with  in- 
credulity; but  they  cannot  fail  to  impress  the  reader  with 
the  conviction,  that  they  possess  a  measvu'e  of  truth  which 
is  confirmed  by  experience.  Mr.  White  condemns  as  alto- 
gether useless,  nay,  as  worse  than  useless,  the  grammar 
studies  of  our  public  schools,  and  recommends  the  study 
of  authors  instead  of  grammars. 

Now,  although  I  agree  in  the  main  with  Mr.  White's 
\^       views  concerning  the  character  of  oui*  tongue,  and  the 

*  unprofitableness  of  grammar  studies  ia  general ;  although 
\S      I  f^y  agree  with  him  that  our  language  must  be  learned, 

•  chiefly,  from  hearing  good  speakers  and  reading  good 
T      writers ;  still  I  maintain  that  this  is  not  enough  ;  that  in 

^     order  to  be  able  to  write  correctly,  and  to  be  sure  that  one 

^      does  write  correctly,  a  fair  knowledge  of  well-defined  prin- 

Vi     dples  is  necessary;    that  the  study  of  these  principles, 

*^     rightly  pursued,  is  not  only  necessary  to  enable  one  to 

^     speak  and  write  correctly,  but  is  useful  as  a  disciphne  of 

^N^    t£e  mind  and  as  a  means  of   general   culture.     Theory 

^    MUST  be  combined  with  practice.     For  although  one  may, 

by  a  large  acquaintance  with  good  writers  and  speakers, 

acquiie  a  good  ear  and  a  discriminating  sense  of  con-ect 

language,  these  are  not  infallible  guides ;  a  person  with 


t>4 


^Jtir-tsS  i  -'ji:<^ 


1 


iv  Editor''s  Preface. 

the  finest  cultvu'e  of  this  Idn  J  may  commit  the  most  egre- 
gious blunders.  It  is  precisely  this  which  is  so  forcibly 
displayed  by  Cobbett  in  his  "Six  Lessons";  where  he 
shows  that  persons  of  the  highest  rank,  the  finest  taste, 
the  gentlest  training,  and  the  most  extensive  learning 
have  committed  errors  of  the  coarsest  kind. 

IMr.  White  says:  "In  speaking  or  writing  English,  we 
have  only  to  choose  the  right  words  and  put  them  in  the 
right  places,  respecting  no  laws  but  those  of  reason,  con- 
forming to  no  order  but  that  which  we  call  logical."  But 
most  people  must  be  taught  what  are  "  the  laws  of  reason, 
and  the  order  which  we  call  logical."  Without  some  in- 
struction in  these  matters,  common  people  will  hardly 
ever  write  half-a-dozen  lines  without  a  blunder.  Take  the 
mechanics  and  shopkeepers,  for  instance,  and  you  will 
find  that  most  of  them  ai'e  unable  to  announce  even  then- 
names  and  business  correctly.  Not  to  mention  the  ludi- 
crous and  amusing  eiTorS  of  which  Mr.  White  himself 
gives  specimens — the  "  inaugxu-ation  of  a  sample-room," 
the  "home-made  hotel,"  etc. — we  have  only  to  look  at  any 
common  sisfn  to  be  convinced  of  the  truth  of  this  state- 
ment.  "  John  Smith,  Iron  Foundry,"  "  John  Jones,  Cigar- 
Store."  John  Smith  is  not  an  u-on  foundry,  nor  John 
Jones  a  cigar-store.  We  know  that  they  mean,  "John 
Smith,  Ii-on  Founder,"  or  "John  Smith's  Iron  Foundry," 
"John  Jones,  Cigar-maker,"  or  "John  Jones's  Cigar- 
Store  " ;  but  they  must  be  taught  to  say  what  they  mean, 
and  the  only  way  to  do  this  is  to  instruct  them  in  the 
piinciples  of  grammai';  or,  if  you  please,  in  "the  laws  of 
reason  and  the  order  which  we  call  logical." 

Boys  and  gu-ls  must  be  taught  to  write  theu-  thoughts 
as  well  as  to  speak  them.  It  is  vain  to  say  otherwise. 
And  the  only  question  is,  what  is  the  best  way  of  teaching 
them.  ]\Ii-.  White  will  not  hsten  to  the  teaching  of  gram- 
mar in  any  shape  or  form  whatever.  Well,  as  far  as  the 
text-book  method,  the  rule-and-word-cramming   method 


Editor's  Preface.  v 

of  the  public  schools,  is  concerned,  he  is  j^erfectly  right ; 
there  is  very  little  profit  to  be  derived  from  it.  But  there 
is  a  right  and  a  wrong  way  of  doing  everything.  !Mt. 
White  has  nevei",  I  imagine,  been  a  teacher;  he  knows 
nothing  of  the  actual  work  of  teaching  young  people  how 
to  write  correctly;  he  knows  nothing  of  teaching,  I  im- 
agine, except  by  writing,  which  is  an  easy,  pleasant,  and 
convenient  way  of  teaching — I  say  not  a  word  against  its 
effectiveness — for  no  questions  are  asked,  except  such  as 
may  be  again  answered  in  writing,  at  one's  leisure,  and 
without  interruption  or  interpellation.  If  he  were  a 
teacher,  he  would  find  it  impossible  to  teach  boys  and 
girls  anything  of  correct  speech  without  giving  them  some 
knowledge  of  the  laws  of  speech — as  impossible  as  it 
would  be  to  teach  them  any  science  or  art  without  men- 
tioning the  name  or  explaining  the  meaning  of  any  one  of 
its  paits.  I  do  not  say  that  this  knowledge  must  be  com- 
municated by  means  of  a  book ;  it  may  be  communicated 
without  a  book;  indeed,  much  better  without  a  book. 
But  taught  it  must  be.  For  when  you  have  shown  boys 
and  gii'ls  how  to  write  a  composition,  and  they  have  writ- 
ten it,  how  ai'e  you  going  to  show  them  or  explain  to  them 
its  errors,  or  how  to  improve  theii"  language,  without  ever 
mentioning  anything  of  the  principles  of  grammai"?  Can 
there  be  any  better  way  of  showing  a  boy  that  "  He  writes 
beautiful "  is  wrong,  than  by  exjjlaining  to  him  the  differ- 
ence between  the  adjective  and  the  adverb?  Can  there  be 
any  better  way  of  showing  him  that  "The  book  lays  on 
the  table "  is  wrong,  than  by  explaining  to  him  the  differ- 
ence between  a  transitive  and  an  intransitive  verb  ?  Can 
there  be  any  better  way  of  showing  that  "I  am  taller 
than  him  "  is  wTong,  than  by  explaining  to  hirn  the  differ- 
ence between  the  nominative  and  the  objective  case? 
That  "  The  color  of  the  leaves  ai-e  green  "  is  wrong,  than 
by  showing  him  the  nature  of  subject  and  predicate,  and 
that  the  one  must  agree  with  the  other"?     These  explana- 


vi  Editor* s  Preface. 

tions,  properly  done,  will  be  like  taking  him  out  of  a  thick 
fog,  and  putting  him  in  broad  sunlight ;  taking  him  out 
of  a  perplexing,  bewildering  maze,  and  putting  him  on 
a  plain  high-road,  with  a  chart  or  compass  by  which  he 
may  walk  right  on  to  his  goal,  with  perfect  ease,  and  in 
perfect  confidence. 

I  have  heard  of  a  lawyer  who,  at  a  banquet  of  gentle- 
men of  his  cloth,  brought  out  a  toast  "  To  the  man  who 
writes  his  own  will."  Why?  Because  he  is  likely  to 
make  use  of  language  that  will  admit  of  question  as  to 
its  meaning ;  and  thus  give  work  to  the  lawyers.  Now  I 
maintain  that  the  man  who  acquu-es  a  clear  comprehension 
of  the  principles  of  our  language  may  write  in  such  a 
manner  as  to  defy  the  astutest  lawyer  to  make  his 
words  mean  anything  else  than  what  he  intends  them 
to  mean ;  which  is  something  that  cannot  be  said  of  the 
man  who  learns  only  by  talking  and  reading.  Such  a  man 
lives  in  the  land  of  oincertainty,  and  never  knows  whither 
he  is  going  or  whence  he  has  come. 

Grammar,  properly  considered  and  properly  taught,  is 
nothing  but  an  unfolding  of  general  principles,  which 
must  be  applied,  more  or  less,  in  all  languages ;  every  one 
of  which  principles  has  a  reason  for  its  existence,  and  the 
majority  of  which  may  be  made  as  plain  and  evident  as  a 
statement  in  mathematics.  IVIr.  White  says  that  nobody 
that  thinks  of  his  grammar  while  wiiting  will  ever  write 
a  sentence  worth  reading.  Of  course,  no  boy  or  girl 
ought  for  a  moment  to  think  of  his  grammar  vv^hile  veiiting 
a  composition;  in  fact,  nobody  ever  does  think  of  his 
grammar  while  intent  on  putting  down  his  thoughts. 
But  when  the  work  is  done,  when  he  has  wi'itten  it,  then 
he  ought  to  be  able  to  review  it  understandingly,  and  see 
that  it  conforms  to  "the  laws  of  reason  and  the  order 
which  we  call  logical";  otherwise  he  will,  in  nine  cases 
out-  of  ten,  write  incoiTectly. 

I  fully  agree  with  Mr.  White,  that  all  the  grammars  of 


Editor's  Preface.  vii 

Brown,  Green,  Wbite,  and  Black,  may  be  thrown  into  the 
fire,  and  the  world  will  be  none  the  worse  off;  for,  ia  my 
opinion,  boys  and  girls  ought  to  be  taught  the  principles 
of  English  grammar  without  placing  any  text-book  what- 
ever in  their  hands.  Never  did  the  Board  of  Education 
of  New  York  adopt  a  wiser  resolution  than  that  recently 
adopted,  abolishing  grammar  text-books  from  the  public 
schools,  in  all  but  the  two  higher  grades.  Any  person, 
that  requires  a  book  in  the  hands  of  his  scholars  in  order 
to  teach  them  the  principles  of  English  grammar,  is  no 
teacher;  he  is  simply  a  orammer-down  of  other  people's 
teaching,  which  he  has  himself  been  unable  to  master. 
A  genuine  teacher  requii-es,  in  order  to  teach  grammar, 
nothing  but  the  blackboard  and  a  piece  of  chalk ;  all  the 
rest  must  come  out  of  his  head  or  out  of  the  heads  of  his 
scholars.  He  may  make  use  of  what  books  he  pleases  in 
building  up  his  own  knowledge ;  but  no  book  should  ever 
be  placed  in  the  hands  of  his  scholai's.  To  children, 
books  on  the  subject  of  giammar  ai'e  generally  in  a  dead 
language;  it  is  all  Greek  to  them;  the  living  speech  of 
the  teacher  is  the  only  language  they  can  understand. 
Away,  therefore,  with  all  grammar  text-books;  for  they 
are  the  dead- weights  of  progress,  fatal  to  all  true  teaching. 

Nor  is  this  book  of  Cobbett's  intended  for  boys  and 
gu'ls  at  school;  it  is  for  those  who  are  studying  out  of 
school;  for  those  who  are  trying  to  acquire  that  real, 
practical,  profitable  knowledge  which  is  acquired  by 
self-exertion,  or  self-help;  for  those  who  have  no  teacher, 
and  are  striving  to  teach  themselves;  for  those  who 
wish  to  learn  in  order  to  teach;  for  those  who  have 
failed  to  make  any  proper  progress  by  means  of  other 
grammars,  and  now  wish  to  understand  and  master  the 
subject  for  themselves. 

I  do  not  deny  that  this  book,  being  so  entirely  different 
from  all  other  grammai's;  so  conversational,  easy,  and 
plain  in  its  character;  I  do  not  deny  that  it  may  be  ad- 


viii  Editor's  Preface. 

vantageously  used  by  school-boys  under  a  competent 
teacher;  nay,  even  under  an  incompetent  teacher; — in 
fact,  if  the  teacher  must  use  a  text-book,  he  cannot  select 
a  better  one  than  Cobbett's ; — ^but  what  I  maintain  is,  that 
it  is  the  only  grammar  that  can  be  profitably  used  with- 
out a  teacher ;  the  only  book  that  can  teach  grammar  by 
ITSELF  to  those  who  are  learning  for  themselves.  As 
long  as  principles  last,  and  as  long  as  men  learn  by  using 
their  reason,  grammar  in  some  shape  inust  be  taught; 
and  this  being  granted,  I  contend  that  there  is  no  better 
WAY  of  teaching  it  than  this  way  of  Cobbett's.  Of 
course,  no  child  ought  ever  to  be  taught  a  word  about 
grammar  until  he  has  learned  to  read  fluently,  and  even 
write  tolerably  well,  the  words  of  his  native  language; 
not  untn  he  has  attained  his  twelfth  or  fourteenth  year; 
for  grammar  is  a  matter  which  cannot  be  rightly  under- 
stood and  assimilated  before  that  age.  This  is  another 
reason  why  the  action  of  the  New  York  Board  of  Educa- 
tion is  a  wise  one. 

Some  of  IMr.  White's  readers — feeUng,  no  doubt,  as  I 
did,  that  even  if  all  ordinary  grammars  are  worthless, 
sortxe  grammar  of  some  sort  is  necessary,  and  being  de- 
lighted by  his  clear  and  sensible  manner  of  writing — 
requested  hirtx  to  write  a  grammar ;  one  of  them  declaring 
that  if  he  did  so,  a  future  generation  would  rise  up  and 
call  him  blessed.  Whereupon  Mr.  White  makes  the  fol- 
lowing amusing  and  significant  reply:  "I  would  gladly 
act  on  this  suggestion  if  it  were  probable  that  any  re- 
sponsible and  competent  publisher  would  make  it  prudent 
for  me  to  do  so.  It  woxild  be  dehghtful  to  believe  that 
the  next  generation  would  rise  up  and  call  me  blessed ; 
but  I  am  of  necessity  much  more  interested  in  the  ques- 
tion whether  the  present  generation  would  rise  up  and 
put  its  hand  into  its  pocket  to  pay  me  for  my  labor.  Any 
one  who  is  acquainted  with  the  manner  in  which  school- 
books  are  '  introduced '  in  this  coimtry,  knows  that  the 


Editor's  Preface.  ix 

opinions  of  competent  persons  upon  the  merits  of  a  book 
have  the  least  possible  influence  upon  its  coming  suf- 
ficiently into  vogue  to  make  its  publication  profitable; 
and  pubhshers,  like  other  men  of  business,  work  for 
money.  One  of  the  trade  made,  I  know — although  not 
to  me — an  answer  like  this  to  a  proposition  to  publish  a 
short  series  of  school-books:  'I  believe  yovir  books  ai'e 
excellent ;  but  supposing  that  they  ai'e  all  that  you  be- 
lieve them  to  be,  I  should,  after  stereotyping  them,  be 
obliged  to  spend  $100,000  in  introducing  them.  I  am 
not  prepared  to  do  this,  and  therefore  I  must  say  No,  at 
once.  The  merit  of  a  book  has  nothing  to  do  with  its 
value  in  trade.'  And  the  speaker  was  a  man  of  experi- 
ence."* 

Now,  I  am  strongly  inclined  to  think  that  these  ad 
mirers  of  Mr.  "WTiite's,  and  all  those  disgusted  with  the 
ordinary  grammars  and  the  ordinary  methods  of  teaching 
grammar,  will,  if  made  acquainted  with  Cobbett's  little 
grammar,  which  has  long  been  out  of  print  in  this  coun- 
try, find  what  they  want,  or  nearly  what  they  want ;  for 
there  does  not  exist  in  our  language  a  clearer  exposition 
of  the  natxu-e  of  English  grammar  than  this  by  Cobbett. 
The  very  language  of  the  grammar  itself  is  a  capital  illus- 
tration of  how  one  ought  to  write ;  and  if  the  scholai'"s^ 
understanding  the  subject  is  a  true  test  of  the  proper 
learning  of  it,  then  no  other  grammar  can,  in  the  attain- 
ment of  this  end,  be  compai'ed  with  this ;  for  thousands, 
who  have  failed  to  understand  the  subject  by  other  gram- 
mars, have  succeeded  by  this,  and  have,  no  doubt,  risen 
up  and  called  Cobbett  blessed  for  Avriting  it.  Even  Mr. 
White  himself,  who  looks  upon  most  other  grammai's  as 
worse  than  useless,  declares  of  Cobbett's  grammar,  that 
he  has  "read  it  with  great  admiration,  both  for  the 
soundness  of  its  teaching  and  the  excellence  of  its  sys- 

♦  "  Words  and  their  Uses,"  p.  427. 


3C  Editor's  Preface. 

tern."*  And  he  also  declares,  I  think  (I  quote  from 
memory),  that  if  gi-ammar  is  to  be  taught  at  all,  it  can- 
not be  taught  better  than  by  this  method  of  Cobbett's. 

At  a  meeting  of  school  superintendents  held  recently 
in  Iowa,  one  of  the  superintendents  read  a  j^aper  on  text- 
books, in  which  he  says:  "Men  of  letters  and  men  of 
science  have  sought  to  veil  their  thoughts  with  the  ob- 
scurity of  strange  and  foreign  terms  rather  than  to  make 
the  road  following  them  in  their  investigation  easy.  They 
have  sought  the  vain-glory  of  stultification  in  their  selec- 
tion of  a  medium  for  the  communication  of  their  thoughts, 
rather  than  the  lasting  praise  consequent  upon  a  simple 
style.  Hence  the  difficulty  in  following  them  in  their 
text-books,  and  the  unprofitableness  of  being  taught  how 
to  read  thought  from  printed  characters."  If  there  is 
one  writer  in  the  whole  range  of  English  Hteratiu'e  who 
deserves  more  praise  than  another  for  avoiding  this  very 
style,  so  common  among  ordinary  writers ;  if  there  is  one 
author  who  is  more  conspicuous  than  any  other  for  cloth- 
ing his  thovights  in  plain,  intelligible  language,  it  is  "Wil- 
ham  Cobbett.  In  all  that  goes  to  the  making  up  of  good 
EngHsh  speech,  he  has  no  superior.  He  was  the  first  to 
show  how  one  ought  to  wiite  for  young  people,  the  first 
to  write  in  a  manner  that  plain  jjeople  could  understand; 
the  first  to  instruct  in  a  truly  edifying  manner.  It  is  his 
great  glory  that  he  uses  simple,  plain  language,  and  he 
makes  every  .subject  he  touches,  whether  it  be  the  defini- 
tion of  a  verb  or  the  explanation  of  the  natm-e  of  the 
national  debt,  perfectly  clear  and  intelligible. 

The  Editor  has  endeavored  to  write  the  notes  in  some- 
thing of  the  same  j)lain  and  easy  style  as  that  in  which 
Cobbett  has  written  the  grammar,  keeping  constantly  in 
mind  that  he  is  addi-essing  a  youth  of  fourteen  or  fifteen 
years  of  age.  Of  coui'se,  he  has  never  for  a  moment 
thought  of  imitating  Cobbett;  but  simply  and  only  of 
making  the  matter  plain. 

*  "  Everv-flav  English, "  Lettei-s  to  the  New  York  Timea. 


Contents  of  the  Grammar. 


Letter  Pag« 

I. — ^Introduction 1 

n. — Definition  of  Grammar  and  of  its  Different 

Branches  or  Parts 8 

m. — Etymology:  the  Different  Parts  of  Speech, 

or  Sorts  of  Words 15 

IV. — Etymology  of  Articles^ 24 

V. — Etymology  of  Nouns 27 

VI. — Etymology  of  Pronouns 38 

VII. — Etymology  of  Adjectives 47 

Vin.— Etymology  of  Verbs 50 

IX. — Etymology  of  Adverbs 83 

X. — Etymology  of  Prepositions 86 

XI. — Etymology  of  Conjunctions ....     89 

XII. — Cautionary  Remarks 89 

XIII. — Syntax  Generally  Considered 92 

XIV. — Syntax :  the  Points  and  Marks  made  use  of 

in  Writing 93 

XV. — Syntax,  as  relating  to  Articles 106 

XVI. — Syntax,  as  relating  to  Nouns 109 

XVII. — Syntax,  as  relating  to  Pronouns 115 

XVIII. — Syntax,  as  relating  to  Adjectives 139 

XIX. — Syntax,  as  relating  to  Verbs 142 


xii  Contents  of  the   Grammar. 

Letter  Page 

XX. — Syntax,   as  lelating  to  Adverbs,   Preposi- 
tions, and  Conjunctions 184 

XXI. — Specimens  of  False  Grammar,  taken  from 
the  Writings  of  Dr.  Johnson,  and  from 

those  of  Dr.  Watts 187 

XXII. — En-ors  and  Nonsense  in  a  King's  Speech . .   209 
XXTEI. — On    Putting    Sentences  together,    and    on 

Figtirative  Language 223 

THE    SIX    LESSONS. 

XXTV. — Six    Lessons,  intended  to   prevent  States- 
men  from   using   False    Grammai",    and 
from  Ma-iting  in  an  Awkward  Manner. . .    230 
Lesson 

I. — On   the   Speech   of   the   Eight   Honorable 
Manners  Sutton,  Speaker  of  the  House 

of  Commons 288 

II. — On  His  Majesty's  Speech  at  the  Close  of 

the  Session  in  1819         240 

III. — On  the  Note  of  Lord  Castlereagh  relative 

to  the  Museums  at  Pai'is   246 

lY. — On  the  Dispatch  of  the  Duke  of  Wellington 

relative  to  the  Same  Subject 252 

V. — On  a  Note  to  Lord  Castlereagh  relative  to 

the  French  Slave  Trade 256 

Yl. — On  Dispatches  of  the  Mai-quis  Wellesley 
relative  to  the  State  of  Ireland  in  1822 . 
— Charge  of  the  Bishop  of  Winchester. . .   260 


DEDICATION. 


TO       HER      MaST       GRA.CIQU<i      MAJKSTY, 

QQEEN  CAROLINE. 

May  it  please  your  Majesty, 

A  work,  having  for  its  objects,  to  lay  the  solid  fovinda- 
tion  of  literary  knowledge  amongst  the  laboring  classes 
of  the  community ;  to  give  practical  effect  to  the  natui'al 
genius  fovmd  in  the  soldier,  the  sailor,  the  apprentice,  and 
the  plough-boy ;  and  to  make  that  genius  a  perennial 
source "oFwealth,  strength,  and  safety  to  the  kingdom; 
such  a  work  natm-ally  seeks  the  approbation  of  your 
majesty,  who,  amongst  all  the  royal  personages  of  the 
present  age,  is  the  only  one  that  appeal's  to  have  justly 
estimated  the  value  of  the  people. 

!  The  nobles  and  the  hierarchy  have  long  had  the  aiTO- 
gance  to  style  themselves  the  pillars  that  support  the 
throne.  But,  as  youi*  majesty  has  now  clearly  ascertained, 
royalty  has,  in  the  hour  of  need,  no  efficient  supporters 
but  the  people. 

During  your  majesty's  long,  ai'duous,  magnanimous, 
and  gallant  struggle  against  matchless  fraud  and  bound- 


xiv  Dedication. 

less  power,  it  must  have  inspii'ed  you  with  great  confi- 
dence to  perceive  the  wonderful  intelligence  and  talent  of 
your  milHons  of  friends ;  while  your  majesty  cannot  have 
failed  to  observe,  that  the  haughty  and  insolent  few  who 
have  been  your  enemies,  have,  upon  all  occasions,  ex- 
hibited an  absence  of  knowledge,  a  poverty  of  genius,  a 
feebleness  of  intellect,  which  nothing  but  a  constant  asso- 
ciation with  malevolence  and  perfidy  could  prevent  from 
being  ascribed  to  dotage  or  idiocy. 

That  to  her,  whose  great  example  is  so  well  calculated 
to  inspu'e  us  with  a  love  of  useful  knowledge,  and  to 
stimulate  us  to  perseverance  in  its  pursuit ;  that  to  her, 
the  records  of  whose  magnanimity  and  courage  will  make 
mean  spite  and  cowardice  hide  their  heads  to  the  end  of 
time ;  that  to  her,  who,  while  in  foreign  lands,  did  honor 
to  Britain's  throne,  and  to  Britain  herself,  by  opening  the 
debtor's  prison,  and  by  setting  the  captive  Christian  free ; 
that  to  her,  who  has  so  long  had  to  enduie  all  the  suffer- 
ings that  mahce  could  invent  and  tyi'anny  execute ;  that 
to  her,  God  may  grant,  to  know  no  more  of  sorrow,  but 
long  to  live  in  health,  prosperity,  and  glory,  surrovmded 
and  supported  by  a  grateful  and  admiring  people,  is  the 
humble  prayer  of 

Your  majesty's  most  dutiful 

And  most  devoted  servant, 

WILLIAM  COBBETT. 
London,  Nov.  25th,  1820. 


Mr.  James  Paul  Cobbett. 


LETTER    I. 

INTRODUCTION. 

North  Hempstead^  Long  Island,  Dec.  6,  1817. 

My  dear  Little  James  : 

You  have  now  ai'rived  at  the  age  of  fourteen  years  with- 
out ever  having  been  bidden,  or  even  advised,  to  look  into 
a  book ;  and  all  you  know  of  reading  or  of  writing  you 
owe  to  your  own  unbiassed  taste  and  choice.  But,  while 
you  have  hved  unpersecuted  by  such  importunities,  you 
have  had  the  very  great  advantage  of  being  bred  up  under 
a  roof  beneath  which  no  cards,  no  dice,  no  gamiug,  no 
senseless  pastime  of  any  description,  ever  found  a  place. 
Li  the  absence  of  these,  books  naturally  became  your  com- 
panions dui"ing  some  part  of  yoiu*  time :  you  have  read 
and  have  written,  because  you  saw  your  elders  read  and 
write,  just  as  you  have  learned  to  ride  and  hunt  and 
shoot,  to  dig  the  beds  in  the  gai'den,  to  trim  the  flowers 
and  to  prune  the  trees.  The  healthfvil  exercise,  and  the 
pleasiu-es,  unmixed  with  fear,  which  you  have  derived 
from  these  sources,  have  given  you  "  a  sound  mind  in  a 
sound  body,"  and  this,  says  an  English  writer,  whose 
works  you  wiU  by-and-by  read,  "  is  the  greatest  blessir.^ 
that  God  can  give  to  man." 

It  is  true  that  this  is  a  very  great  blebeing ,  hxit  FAcn 
1  ' 


2  Introduction. 

soundness  of  mind,  without  any  mental  acquirements,  is 
possessed  by  millions ;  it  is  an  ordinary  possession ;  and 
it  gives  a  man  no  fair  pretensions  to  merit,  because  lie 
owes  it  to  accident,  and  not  to  any  thing  done  by  himself. 
But  knowledge,  in  any  art  or  science,  being  always  the 
fiTiit  of  obsen^ation,  study,  or  practice,  gives,  in  proportion 
to  its  extent  and  usefulness,  the  possessor  a  just  claim  to 
respect.  We  do,  indeed,  often  see  all  the  outward  marks 
of  respect  bestowed  upon  persons  merely  because  they 
are  rich  or  powerful ;  but  these,  while  they  ai"e  bestowed 
wdth  pain,  ai'e  received  without  pleasui-e.  They  di'op  fi'om 
the  tongue  or  beam  from  the  featvu-es,  but  have  no  com- 
munication with  the  heart.  They  are  not  the  voluntary 
offeiings  of  admiration,  or  of  gratitude ;  but  ai'e  extorted 
from  the  hopes,  the  feai's,  the  anxieties,  of  poverty,  of 
meanness,  or  of  guilt. '  Nor  is  respect  due  to  honesty, 
fidehty,  or  any  such  qualities;  because  dishonesty  and 
perfidy  are  crimes.  To  entitle  a  man  to  respect,  there 
must  be  something  of  his  own  doing,  beyond  the  bounds 
of  his  well-known  duties  and  obligations. 

Therefore,  being  extremely  desu'ous  to  see  you,  my 
dear  James,  an  object  of  respect,  I  now  call  upon  you  to 
apply  your  mind  to  the  acquiring  of  that  kind  of  knowl- 
edge which  is  inseparable  fi'om  an  acquaintance  with 
books ;  for,  though  knowledge  in  every  art  and  science  is, 
if  properly  aj^plied,  worthy  of  praise  in  proportion  to  its 
extent  and  usefulness,  there  are  some  kinds  of  knowledge 
which  ai'e  justly  considered  as  of  a  superior  order,  not 
only  because  the  jDossession  of  them  is  a  proof  of  more 
than  ordinaiy  industry  and  talent,  but  because  the  appli- 
cation of  them  has  naturally  a  more  powerful  influence  in 
the  affairs  and  on  the  condition  of  om*  friends,  acquaint- 
ances, neighbors,  and  coiinfry.  Blake,  the  Titchfield 
thatcher,  who  broke  his  leg  into  splinters  in  falling  from 
a  wheat-rick,  was,  on  account  of  the  knowledge  which  he 
possessed,  beyond  that  of  laborers  in  general,  an  object 


Introduction.  3 

of  respect;  but,  in  its  degi-ee,  and  iu  the  feelings  from 
which  it  arose,  how  different  was  that  respect  fi'om  the 
respect  due  to  oiu-  excellent  neighbor,  Mr.  Blundell,  who 
restored  the  leg  to  j)erfect  use,  after  six  garrison  and 
army  surgeons  had  declai'ed  that  it  was  impossible  to 
preserve  it,  and  that,  if  the  leg  were  not  cut  off,  the  man 
must  die  withm  twenty-four  horns !  It  is  probable  that 
the  time  of  IVIi-.  Bkmdell  was  not,  on  this  occasion,  occu- 
pied more,  altogether,  than  foui*  days  and  four  nights; 
yet,  the  effect  was  a  great  benefit  to  be  enjoyed  by  Blake 
for  probably  thu'ty  or  forty  years  to  come :  and,  while  we 
must  see  that  this  benefit  would  necessarily  extend  itself 
to  the  whole  of  his  numerous  family,  we  must  not  over- 
look those  feelings  of  pleasure  which  the  cui'e  would 
natru'ally  produce  amongst  friends,  acquaintances,  and 
neighbors. 

The  respect  due  to  the  profession  of  the  sm-geon  or 
physician  is,  however,  of  an  order  inferior  to  that  which 
is  due  to  the  profession  of  the  law ;  for  whether  in  the 
character  of  counsellor  or  of  judge,  here  are  required,  not 
only  uncommon  industry,  labor,  and  talent,  in  the  acquire- 
ment of  knowledge ;  but  the  application  of  this  knowledge 
in  defending  the  property  of  the  feeble  or  incautious 
against  the  attacks  of  the  strong  and  the  wiles  of  the 
crafty,  in  affording  protection  to  innocence  and  securing 
punishment  to  guilt,  has,  in  the  affairs  of  men  and  on 
their  condition  in  life,  a  much  more  extensive  and  pow- 
erfvd  influence  than  can  possibly  arise  from  the  appli- 
cation of  sui-gical  or  medical  knowledge. 

To  the  functions  of  statesmen  and  legislators  is  due  the 
highest  respect  which  can  be  shown  by  man  to  anything 
human ;  for,  not  only  are  the  industry,  labor,  and  talent 
requisite  in  the  acquirement  of  knowledge,  still  greater 
and  far  greater  here,  than  in.  the  profession  of  the  law ; 
but,  of  the  application  of  this  knowledge,  the  effects  are 
so  transcendent  in  point  of  magnitude  as  to  place  them 


4  Introduction. 

beyond  all  tlie  bounds  of  comparison.  Here  it  is  not  in- 
dividual persons  with  their  families,  friends,  and  neigh- 
bors that  are  affected ;  but  whole  countries  and  communi- 
ties. Here  the  matters  to  be  discussed  and  decided  on 
are  peace  or  wai',  and  the  liberty  or  slavery,  happiness  or 
misery,  of  nations.  Here  a  single  instance  of  neglect,  a 
single  oversight,  a  single  error,  may  load  with  calamity 
millions  of  men,  and  entail  that  calamity  on  a  long  series 
of  futui'e  generations. 

This  is  true  enough ;  but  it  is  a  remarkable  fact  that  nearly  all 
the  efforts  of  legislators,  political  as  well  as  ecclesiastical,  have 
been  of  such  a  nature  as  to  cause  anything  but  respect  for  them. 
The  historian  Buckle  shows  that  the  great  bulk  of  the  enactments 
of  legislators,  since  the  beginning  of  history,  have  been  conducive 
of  results  directly  opposite  to  those  for  which  they  were  intended; 
that  is,  evil  results;  and  that  the  only  beneficial  legislation  of  mod- 
ern times  has  consisted  in  the  undoing  of  what  previous  legislators 
have  done.  So  that,  of  all  the  personages  in  history,  none,  unhap- 
pily, are  deserving  of  more  profound  contempt,  or,  at  least,  of  less 
esteem,  than  precisely  those  very  men  who  ought  to  have  secured 
the  greatest  esteem,  legislators.  And  all  this,  not  because  they 
were  bad  men,  but  because  they  were  lacking  in  knowledge. 

And  if  this  is  the  case  with  law-makers  of  honest  intentions, 
what  shall  we  say  of  those  execrable  wretches,  those  deadly  can- 
cers on  the  body  politic,  who,  on  becoming  members  of  a  legisla- 
ture, sell  themselves,  body  and  soul,  to  wealthy  corporations? 
What  shall  we  think  of  their  influence  on  the  progress  and  welfare 
of  the  people,  whose  interests  they  were  elected  to  protect  and  to 
promote  ?  Such  creatures  lose  not  only  the  esteem  of  all  honest 
men,  but  their  own  esteem,  their  self-esteem ;  they  become  con- 
temptible, not  only  in  the  eyes  of  those  who  buy  tliem,  but  in  their 
own  eyes  ;  and  as  to  the  future,  the  hottest,  deepest  gulfs  in  hell 
are  yawning  for  them ! 

As  a  contrast  to  Buckle's  judgment  of  the  great  crowd  of  igno- 
rant and  consequently  pernicious  legislators,  consider  this  remark- 
able statement  which  the  same  writer  makes  of  the  power  and 
influence  of  one  man  of  real  knowledge :  "Well  may  it  be  said  of 
Adam  Smith  (author  of  '  The  Wealth  of  Nations '),  and  said  too 
without  fear  of  contradiction,  that  this  solitary  Scotchman  has,  by 
the  publication  of  one  single  work,  contributed  more  towards  the 


Introduction.  5 

happiness  of  man,  than  has  been  effected  by  the  united  abilities  of 
all  the  statesmen  and  legislators  of  whom  histoiy  has  preserved  an 
authentic  account." — Hist,  of  Civilization,  Vol  I.,  p.  155. 

But,  my  dear  James,  you  will  always  bear  in  mind  that 
as  the  degree  and  quality  of  our  respect  rise  in  proportion 
to  the  influence  which  the  different  bi'anches  of  knowledge 
naturally  have  in  the  aflfau'S  and  on  the  condition  of  men, 
so,  in  the  cases  of  an  imperfection  in  knowledge,  or  of 
neglect  in  its  application,  or  of  its  perversion  to  bad  pur- 
poses, all  the  feelings  which  ai'e  opposite  to  that  of  respect 
rise  in  the  same  proportion.  To  ignorant  pretenders  to 
sui'gery  and  medicine  we  awai'd  oxir  contempt  and  scorn; 
on  time-serving  or  treacherous  counsellors,  and  on  cruel 
or  paitial  judges,  we  inflict  oui*  detestation  and  abhor- 
rence; while,  on  rapacious,  corrupt,  perfidious,  or  tyran- 
nical statesmen  and  legislators,  the  voice  of  human  nature 
cries  aloud  for  execration  and  vengeance. 

The  particular  path  of  knowledge  to  be  pursued  by  you 
will  be  of  your  own  choosing ;  but,  as  to  knowledge  con- 
nected with  books,  there  is  a  step  to  be  taken  before  you 
can  fah-ly  enter  upon  any  path.  In  the  immense  field  of 
this  kind  of  knowledge,  innumerable  ai'e  the  paths,  and 
Grammak  is  the  gate  of  entrance  to  them  all.  And  if 
grammar  is  so  useful  in  the  attaining  of  knowledge,  it  is 
absolutely  necessary  in  order  to  enable  the  possessor  to 
communicate,  by  writing,  that  knowledge  to  others,  with- 
out which  communication  the  possession  must  be  com- 
paratively useless  to  himself  in  many  cases,  and,  in  almost 
all  cases,  to  the  rest  of  mankind. 

The  actions  of  men  proceed  from  their  thoughts.  In 
order  to  obtain  the  cooperation,  the  concuiTence,  or  the 
consent,  of  others,  we  must  communicate  our  thoughts  to 
them.  The  means  of  this  communication  are  words;  and 
gprammar  teaches  us  how  to  make  use  of  words.  There- 
fore, in  all  the  ranks,  degrees,  and  situations  of  hfe,  a 
knowledge  of  the  principles  and  rules  of  grammar  must 


6  Introduction. 

be  usefiil;  in  some  situations  it  must  be  necessary  to 
the  avoiding  of  really  injuiious  errors;  and  in  no  sit- 
uation, wliicli  calls  on  man  to  place  his  thoughts  upon 
paper,  can  the  possession  of  it  fail  to  be  a  source  of  self- 
gratulation,  or  the  want  of  it  a  cause  of  mortification  and 
sorrow. 

But,  to  the  acquuiug  of  this  branch  of  knowledge,  my 
dear  son,  there  is  one  motive  which,  though  it  ought  at 
all  times,  to  be  strongly  felt,  ought,  at  the  present  time, 
to  be  so  felt  in  an  extraordinary  degree :  I  mean  that  de- 
su'e  which  every  man,  and  especially  every  young  man, 
should  entertain  to  be  able  to  assert  with  effect  the  rights 
and  liberties  of  his  country.  When  you  come  to  read  the 
history  of  those  laws  of  England  by  which  the  freedom 
of  the  people  has  been  secui-ed,  and  by  which  the  happi- 
ness and  power  and  glory  of  oui'  famed  and  beloved  coun- 
try have  been  so  greatly  promoted ;  when  you  come  to 
read  the  histpry  of  the  struggles  of  our  forefathers,  by 
which  those  sacred  laws  have,  from  time  to  time,  been 
defended  against  despotic  ambition ;  by  which  they  have 
been  restored  to  vigor  when  on  the  eve  of  perishing ;  by 
which  their  violators  have  never  failed,  in  the  end,  to  be 
made  to  feel  the  just  vengeance  of  the  people ;  when  you 
come  to  read  the  history  of  these  struggles  in  the  cause 
of  freedom,  you  will  find  that  tyranny  has  no  enemy  so 
formidable  as  the  pen.  And,  while  you  will  see  with  exulta- 
tion the  long-imprisoned,  the  heavily-fined,  the  banished 
"Wilham  Prynne,  retiu'ning  to  liberty,  borne  by  the  j^eople 
from  Southampton  to  London,  over  a  road  strewed  with 
flowers ;  then  accusing,  bringing  to  trial,  and  to  the  block, 
the  tyrants  from  whose  hands  he  and  his  country  had  un- 
justly and  cruelly  suffered;  while  youi-  heart  and  the 
heai-t  of  every  young  man  in  the  kingdom  will  bovmd  with 
joy  at  the  sj)ectacle,  you  ought  all  to  bear  in  mind  that, 
without  a  knowledge  of  grammar,  Mi*.  Pryime  could  never 
have  perfoi-med  any  of  those  acts  by  which  his  name  has 


Introduction.  7 

fceen  thus  preserved,  and  which  have  caused  his  memory 
to  be  held  in  honor. 

Though  I  have  now  said  what,  I  am  sure,  will  be  more 
than  sufficient  to  make  you  entertain  a  strong  desii'e  to 
take  this  first  step  in  the  road  to  hterary  knowledge.  I 
cannot  conclude  this  introductory  letter  without  observ- 
ing, that  you  ought  to  proceed  in  jo\xr  study,  not  only 
with  dihgence,  but  with  patience;  that,  if  you  meet  with 
difficulties,  you  should  bear  in  mind  that,  to  enjoy  the 
noble  prospect  from  Port's-Down  Hill,  you  had  first  to 
climb  slowly  to  the  top;  and  that,  if  those  difficulties 
gather  about  you  and  impede  your  way,  you  have  only  to 
call  to  your  recollection  any  one  of  the  many  days  that 
you  have  toiled  through  briers  and  brambles  and  bogs, 
cheered  and  urged  on  by  the  hope  of  at  last  finding  and 
killing  your  game. 

I  have  put  my  work  into  the  form  of  Letters,  in  order 
that  I  might  be  continually  reminded  that  I  was  address- 
ing myself  to  persons  who  needed  to  be  spoken  to  with 
great  clearness.  I  have  numbered  the  Letters  themselves, 
and  also  the  paragraphs,  in  order  that  I  might  be  able,  in 
some  parts  of  the  work,  to  refer  you  to,  or  tell  you  where 
to  look  at,  other  pai'ts  of  the  work.  And  here  I  will  just 
add,  that  a  sentence,  used  as  a  term  in  Grammar,  means 
one  of  those  portions  of  words  which  are  divided  from  the 
rest  by  a  single  dot,  which  is  called  a  period,  or  full  point ; 
and  that  a  paragraph  means  one  of  those  collections,  or 
blocks,  of  sentences  which  are  divided  from  the  rest  of  the 
work  by  beginning  a  new  line  a  ^ii\e  fu7'ther  iti  than  the 
lines  in  general ;  and,  of  coui'se,  all  this  part,  which  I  have 
just  now  wi'itten,  beginning  with  "  I  have  put  my  work 
into  theform^''  is  9,  paragraph. 

In  a  confident  reliance  on  youi*  attentiveness,  industry, 
and  patience,  I  have  a  hope  not  less  confident  of  seeing 
you  a  man  of  real  leai-ning,  employing  your  time  and 
talents  in  aiding  the  cause  of  truth  and  justice,  in  afford- 


8  Definition  of 

ing  protection  to  defenceless  innocence,  and  in  drawing 
down  vengeance  on  lawless  oppression ;  and,  in  that  hope, 
I  am  your  happy,  as  well  as  affectionate,  father, 

WILLIAM  COBBETT. 


LETTER    II. 

DEFINITION   OF   GRAMMAR,  AND    OF    ITS    DIFFERENT    BRANCHES, 
OR    PARTS. 

My  dear  James: 

1.  In  the  foregoing  Letter  I  have  laid  before  you  some 
of  the  inducements  to  the  study  of  Grammar.  In  this  I 
will  define,  or  describe,  the  thing  called  Grammar ;  and 
also  its  different  JBranches^  or  Parts. 

2.  Grammar,  as  I  observed  to  you  before,  teaches  us 
how  to  make  use  of  loords;  that  is  to  say,  it  teaches  us  how 
to  make  use  of  them  in  a  proper  manner,  as  I  used  to 
teach  you  how  to  sow  and  plant  the  beds  in  the  garden ; 
for  you  could  have  thrown  about  seeds  and  stuck  in 
plants  of  some  sort  or  other,  in  some  way  or  other,  without 
any  teaching  of  mine ;  and  so  can  anybody,  without  rules 
or  instructions,  put  masses  of  words  upon  paper ;  but  to 
be  able  to  choose  the  words  Avhich  ought  to  be  employed, 
and  to  place  them  where  they  ought  to  be  placed,  we  must 
become  acquainted  with  certain  principles  and  rules; 
and  these  jDiinciples  and  rules  constitute  what  is  called 
Grammar. 

3.  Nor  must  you  suppose,  by-and-by,  when  you  come 
to  read  about  Houns  and  Verbs  and  Pronouns,  that  all 
this  tends  to  nothing  but  mere  ornamental  learning ;  that 
it  is  not  altogether  necessary,  and  that  people  may  write 
to  be  understood  very  well  without  it.  This  is  not  the 
case;  for,  without  a  good  deal  of  knowledge  relative  to 
these  same  Nouns  and  Verbs,  those  who  write  are  never 


Gnv)imair  and  its  branches.  9 

sure  that  they  put  upon  paper  what  they  mean  to  put 
upon  paper.  I  shall,  before  the  close  of  these  Letters,  show 
you  that  even  very  learned  men  have  frequently  written, 
and  caused  to  be  pubHshed,  not  only  what  they  did  not 
mean,  but  the  very  contrary  of  what  they  meant ;  and  if 
errors,  such  as  are  here  spoken  of,  are  sometimes  com- 
mitted by  learned  men,  into  what  endless  errors  must 
those  fall  who  have  no  knowledge  of  any  principles  or 
rules,  by  the  observance  of  which  the  like  may  be  avoided! 
Grammai",  perfectly  understood,  enables  us  not  only  to 
express  our  meaning  fully  and  clearly,  but  so  to  express 
it  as  to  enable  us  to  defy  the  ingenuity  of  man  to  give  to 
oui*  words  any  other  meaning  than  that  which  we  ourselves 
intend  them  to  express.  This,  therefore,  is  a  science  of 
substantial  utility. 

4.  As  to  the  different  Branches  or  Parts  of  Grammar, 
they  are ybw77  and  they  are  thus  named:  Orthography, 
Prosody,  Etymology,  and  Syntax. 

5.  There  are  two  of  these  branches  on  which  we  have 
very  httle  to  say,  and  the  names  of  which  have  been  kept 
in  use  fi"om  an  unwillingness  to  give  up  the  practice  of 
former  times ;  but,  as  it  is  usual  to  give  them  a  place  in 
books  of  this  kind,  I  will  explain  to  you  the  natui'e  of  all 
the  iova'  branches. 

6.  ORTHOGRAPHY  is  a  word  made  up  of  two  Greek 
words,  which  mean  spelling.  The  use  of  foreign  words, 
in  this  manner,  was  introduced  at  the  tima  when  the 
English  language  was  in  a  very  barbarous  ^'tate;  and, 
though  this  use  has  been  continued,  it  ought  to  be  a  rule 
with  you,  always,  when  you  either  vnite  or  speak,  to  avoid 
the  use  of  any  foreign  or  uncommon  word,  if  you  can  ex- 
press your  meaning  as  fully  and  clearly  by  an  EngHsh  word 
in  common  use.  However,  Orthography  means  neither 
more  nor  less  than  the  very  humble  business  of  putting 
letters  together  properly,  so  that  they  shall  form  loords. 
This  is  so  very  childish  a  concern  that  I  will  not  appear  to 

1* 


10  Definition  of 

suppose  it  necessary  for  me  to  dwell  upon  it ;  but  as  you 
will,  by-and-by,  meet  with  some  directions,  under  the  head 
of  Etymology,  in  which  Voicels  and  Consonants  will  be 
spoken  of,  I  will  here,  for  form's  sake,  just  observe  that 
the  letters.  A,  E,  I,  O,  and  U,  are  l^'o^oels.  Y,  in  certain 
cases,  is  also  a  Voicel.  All  the  rest  of  the  letters  of  the 
alphabet  are  Consonants. 

This  "very  humble  business"  of  spelling,  however,  must  not  bo 
passed  over  so  lightly ;  for  it  is  a  subject  of  very  great  difficulty  to 
many  persons.  It  is  notorious  that  many  of  our  ablest  EnglisJi 
authors  were  never  able  to  spell  or  punctuate  correctly,  and  that 
the  correctness  of  their  printed  books,  in  this  respect,  is  entirely 
owing  to  the  skill  of  the  compositor.  Some  of  their  manuscripts 
might,  indeed,  be  very  aptly  compared  to  the  communication  of 
Tom  Hood's  witty  but  illiterate  correspondent,  who,  on  writing 
him  a  long  letter  without  any  points  whatever,  jotted  them  all 
down  in  a  row  at  the  end  of  his  letter,  and  told  him  to  "pepper 
and  salt"  as  he  pleased.  It  is  the  compositor  that  does  the  " pep- 
pering and  salting,"  and  much  more,  for  many  a  writer  of  large 
pretensions. 

The  orthography  of  our  English  words,  from  their  various  deri- 
vation and  the  variety  of  sounds  given  to  the  letters  of  the  alpha- 
bet, is  perhaps  more  difficult  than  that  of  the  words  of  any  other 
modern  tongue;  and  I  wish  to  indicate  here  the  very  best  and 
simplest  way  of  learning  it,  together  with  the  punctuation  of  the 
sentences — I  mean  by  dictations.  It  is  not  necessary  to  have  a 
teacher  for  this  purpose ;  anybody  who  can  read  correctly  can  dic- 
tate to  you.  All  you  have  to  do  is  to  write  down  the  words  and 
points  that  are  slowly  read  to  you  from  a  book,  and  when  you 
have  written  about  a  page,  take  the  printed  book  and  compare 
your  words  and  points  with  those  in  the  book,  and  correct  accord- 
ingly. This  is  the  cure  for  all  spelling-reform  nonsense.  Write 
page  after  page  to  dictation,  and  you  will  soon  find  it  all  come  very 
natural— you  will  wonder  how  anybody  could  ever  think  of  spell- 
ing the  words  otherwise  than  the  way  they  are  spelled,  or  how 
they  cmild  be  spelled  otherwise. 

The  old  method — still  practiced  in  our  public  schools — of  giving 
out  columns  of  single  and  separate  words  to  be  spelled,  verbally 
and  in  writing,  many  of  them  such  as  may  never  be  seen  twice 
again  in  a  lifetime,  is  of  very  little  value ;  for  it  is  disjointed,  dry, 
and  pointless ;  whereas,  by  dictating  sentences  from  a  book,  the 


Grammar  and  its  Braixc.hea.  11 

scholar  learns:  1st.  to  spell  the  words  in  common  use;  3d,  to 
spell  words  according  to  their  meaning  (there,  their ;  hair,  hare ; 
pear,  pair);  3d,  to  associate  words  with  ideas,  thus  instinctively 
and  imperceptibly  learning  their  proper  meaning  and  right  use ; 
and,  4th,  he  acquires  vl  feeling  or  taste  for  correct  language ;  words 
and  sentences  are  impressed  forcibly  on  his  mind  by  hearing, 
seeing,  and  writing  them.  Besides,  he  learns  in  this  way,  better 
than  in  any  other,  a  knowledge  of  punctuation,  which  in  English 
is  different  with  different  writers ;  in  fact,  every  English  writer 
has  his  own  style  of  punctuating,  for  this  is  generally  a  matter  of 
taste  and  feeling.  In  writing  to  dictation,  the  work  done  by  the 
scholar  is  nearly  the  same  as  that  done  by  the  compositor,  who  is 
the  best  speller  and  punctuator  in  the  world.  Therefore,  get 
somebody  to  dictate  to  j^ou  every  day  a  page,  or  half  a  page,  from 
a  book,  and  you  will,  in  a  few  months,  acquire  a  better  knowledge 
of  orthograpliy  and  punctuation  than  if  you  had  spelled  your  way 
through  a  dozen  spelling-books. 

7.  PROSODY  is  a  word  taken  from  the  Greek  lan- 
guage, and  it  means  not  so  much  as  is  expressed  by  the 
more  common  word  PRONUNCIATION ;  that  is  to  say, 
the  business  of  using  the  proper  sound,  and  employing 
the  due  length  of  time,  in  the  utteiing  of  syllables  and 
words.  This  is  a  matter,  however,  which  ought  not  to 
occupy  much  of  your  attention,  because  pronunciation,  is 
learned  as  bu'ds  learn  to  chirp  and  sing.  In  some  counties 
of  England  many  words  are  pronounced  in  a  manner  dif- 
ferent from  that  in  which  they  ai'e  pronounced  in  other 
counties ;  and  between  the  pronunciation  of  Scotland  and 
that  of  Hampshu-e  the  difference  is  very  great  indeed. 
But,  while  all  inquiiies  into  the  causes  of  these  differences 
are  useless,  and  all  attempts  to  remove  them  are  vain,  the 
differences  are  of  very  Httle  real  consequence.  For  in- 
stance, though  the  Scotch  say  coorn,  the  Londoners  cavm^ 
and  the  Hampshh-e  folks  cam,  we  know  they  all  mean  to 
say  corn.  Childi'en  will  pronounce  as  then*  fathers  and 
mothers  pronounce;  and  if,  in  common  conversation,  or 
in  speeches,  the  matter  be  good  and  judiciously  arranged, 
the   facts   clearly  stated,  the   arguments  conclusive,  the 


12  Definition  of 

words  well  chosen  and  properly  placed,  hearers  whose 
approbation  is  worth  having  will  pay  very  little  attention 
to  the  accent.  In  short,  it  is  sense,  and  not  sound,  which 
is  the  object  of  your  pursuit ;  and,  therefore,  I  have  said 
enough  about  Prosody. 

Here  is  a  circumstance  that  suggests  a  by  no  means  unfavorable 
commentary  on  the  difference  between  the  pronunciation  of  Eng- 
lish in  tliis  country  and  in  England  :  Mr.  James  Paul  Cobbett,  son 
of  William  Cobbett,  lias  added  to  a  late  edition  of  this  grammar,  a 
sixteen-page  chapter  on  pronunciation,  pointing  out  the  various 
classes  of  words  commonly  mispronounced  by  classes  and  counties 
of  people  in  England.  After  carefully  noting  them  all,  I  have  come 
to  the  conclusion  that  the  whole  batch  is  utterly  useless  for  our 
people,  as  I  do  not  know  of  a  single  class  of  people  in  this  country 
who  make  any  one  of  the  same  mispronunciations.  Many  of  the 
mistakes  are,  it  is  true,  made  here,  too;  as,  bood  for  bud;  doon 
for  done  ;  aboove  for  above ;  fayther  for  father ;  awch  for  arch ; 
glawss  for  glass ;  but  they  are  not  made  by  classes  of  people ;  they 
are,  in  fact,  made  by  none  but  a  few  illiterate  and  pretentious 
people. 

The  most  common  mistake  made  by  people  in  this  country  con- 
sists in  misplacing  the  accent  of  words  ;  as,  in-dus'-try  for  in'-dus- 
try  ;  in-ter-est'-ing  for  in'-ter-est-ing.  All  these  may  be  corrected 
by  reference  to  the  dictionary,  in  which  the  pronunciation  of  every 
word  is  properly  marked.  The  stress  of  the  voice  always  falls  on 
that  sj'Uable  having  the  accent-mark  (') ;  thus,  per'-emp-to-rj^,  not 
per-emp'to-ry.  I  have  read  somewhere  that,  on  one  occasion, 
when  Mr.  Sumner's  colleague  in  the  Senate  said  he  hoped  that  the 
honorable  gentlemen  would  make  an  inquiry  into  some  matter, 
Mr.  Sumner  whispered  to  him :   "inquiry." 

By-the-bye,  there  is  one  other  mistake  in  pronunciation,  which 
is  very  common  among  Americans,  in  the  Eastern  States  at  least, 
and  that  is  pronouncing  such  words  as  new,  dew,  stew,  as  if  they 
were  written  noo,  doo,  stoo.  They  must  be  pronounced  like  few 
and  view.  The  same  error  is  made  in  such  words  as  duty,  grati- 
tude, where  the  u  must  be  long,  as  in  useful. 

There  is  something  else  that  usually  comes  under  this  heading. 
The  Greek  word  prosodia  means,  literally,  "belonging  to  song 
or  hymn,"  and  is  usually  employed  to  signify  that  part  of  gram- 
mar which  treats  of  the  rules  of  rhythm  in  metrical  composi- 
tions.    Cobbett,  it  is  well  knov/n,  had  very  little  admiration  for 


Crrainmar  and  its  Branches.  13 

poetry,  and  no  doubt  considered  it  a  waste  of  time  to  say  anything 
about  its  laws ;  but,  though  perhaps  not  one  in  a  liundred  of  those 
who  study  this  book  will  ever  attempt  to  write  poetry,  every  intel- 
ligent person  ought  to  know  something  of  its  laws ;  and  I  shall, 
therefore,  at  the  end  of  the  book,  after  more  necessary  mat- 
ters have  been  mastered,  attempt  to  show  what  a  simple  matter 
this  is,  as  far  as  English  is  concerned. 

8.  ETYMOLOGY  is  a  very  different  matter ;  and,  undei 
this  head,  you  will  enter  on  your  study.  This  is  a  word 
which  has  been  formed  out  of  two  Greek  words ;  and  it 
means  the  pedigree  or  relathtishij?  qfzoords,  or,  the  man- 
ner in  which  one  word  grows  out  of,  or  comes  from, 
another  word.  For  instance,  the  word  ioalk  expresses  an 
action,  or  movement,  of  our  legs ;  but,  in  some  cases  we 
say  walks,  in  others  vmlked,  in  others  walking.  These 
three  latter  words  are  all  different  from  each  other,  and 
they  all  differ  from  the  original  word,  toalk;  but  the 
action  or  movement,  expressed  by  each  of  the  foui',  is 
precisely  the  same  sort  of  action  or  movement,  and  the 
thi'ee  latter  words  grow  out  of,  or  come  from,  the  first. 
The  words  here  mentioned  differ  from  each  other  with 
regard  to  the  letters  of  which  they  are  composed.  The 
difference  is  made  in  order  to  express  differences  as  to  the 
J^ersons  who  walk,  as  to  the  Number  of  persons,  as  to  the 
Time  of  walking.  You  will  come,  by-and-by,  to  the  prin- 
ciples and  rules  according  to  which  the  varying  of  the 
spelling  of  words  is  made  to  correspond  with  these  and 
other  differences;  and  these  principles  and  rules  consti- 
tute what  is  called  Etymology. 

9.  SYNTAX  is  a  word  which  comes  from  the  Greek. 
It  means,  in  that  language,  the  joining  of  several  things 
together;  and,  as  used  by  grammarians,  it  means  those 
piinciples  and  rules  which  teach  us  how  to  put  words 
together  so  as  to  form  sentences.  It  means,  in  short,  seti- 
tence-making.  Having  been  taught  by  the  rules  of  Ety- 
tnology  what  are  the  relationships  of  words,  how  words 
grow  out   of   each   other,  how  they  are  varied  in  then- 


14  Definition  of  Grannndr^  etc. 

letters  in  order  to  correspond  with  the  A-ariation  in  the 
circumstances  to  which  they  apply,  Syntax  will  teach  you 
how  to  give  all  youi*  words  their  proper  situations  or 
places,  when  you  come  to  put  them  together  into  sen- 
tences. And  here  you  will  have  to  do  with  pohtts  as  well 
as  with  words.  The  points  are  four  in  number,  the 
Comma,  the  Semi- Colon,  the  Colon,  and  the  Period. 
Besides  these  points,  there  are  certain  marks,  such  as  the 
m,ark  of  interrogation,  for  instance;  and  to  use  these 
points  and  marks  properly  is,  as  you  will  by-and-by  find, 
a  matter  of  very  great  importance. 

10.  I  have  now  given  you  a  description  of  Grammar, 
and  of  its  separate  Branches  or  Parts.  I  have  shown  you 
that  the  first  two  of  these  Branches  may  be  dismissed 
without  any  further  notice ;  but  very  different  indeed  is 
the  case  with  regard  to  the  latter  two.  Each  of  these 
will  require  several  Letters ;  and  these  Letters  will  contain 
matter  which  it  will  be  impossible  to  understand  without 
the  greatest  attention.  You  must  read  soberly  and  slowly,. 
and  you  must  think  as  you  read.  You  must  not  hurry 
on  fi'om  one  Letter  to  another,  as  if  you  were  reading  a 
history ;  but  you  must  have  patience  to  get,  if  possible,  at 
a  clear  comprehension  of  one  part  of  the  subject  before 
you  proceed  to  another  part.  When  I  was  studying  the 
French  language,  the  manner  in  which  I  proceeded  was 
this:  when  I  had  attentively  read  over,  thi-ee  times,  a 
lesson,  or  other  division  of  my  Grammai",  I  wrote  the 
lesson  down  upon  a  loose  sheet  of  paper.  Then  I  read  it 
again  several  times  in  my  own  hand-wi'iting.  Then  I 
copied  it,  in  a  very  plain  hand,  and  without  a  blot,  into  a 
book,  which  I  had  made  for  the  pm-pose.  But  if,  in  writ- 
ing my  lesson  down  on  a  loose  sheet  of  paper,  I  commit- 
ted one  single  error,  however  trifling,  I  used  to  tear  the 
paper,  and  wi'ite  the  whole  down  again ;  and,  frequently, 
this  occurred  three  or  four  times  in  the  writing  down  of 
one  lesson.      I,  at  first,  found  this  labor  veiy  irksome; 


J*arts  of  i^eech.  15 

but,  haAdng-  imposed  it  on  myself  as  a  duty,  I  faithfully 
discharged  that  duty ;  and,  long  before  I  had  proceeded 
half  way  thi'ough  my  Grammar,  I  experienced  all  the 
benefits  of  my  industry  and  perseverance. 

This  was,  no  doubt,  how  Cobbett,  iu  his  soldier  days,  learned  to 
spell  and  punctuate ;  for  what  he  did  was  as  good  as  writing  so 
many  dictations.  If  any  scholar  feels  like  following  his  example, 
he  may  lighten  the  labor  and  seciu'e  nearly  equal  benefit  l)y  writ- 
ing the  lessons  down  as  dictations. 


LETTEK    III. 

ETYMOLOGY. 

The  different  Parts  of  Speech,  or  Sorts  of  Words. 
My  dear  James: 

11.  In  the  second  Letter  I  have  given  you  a  description 
of  Etymology,  and  shown  you  that  it  treats  of  the  pedi- 
gree, or  relationship,  of  words,  of  the  nature  of  which  re- 
lationship I  have  given  you  a  specimen  in  the  word  walk. 
The  next  thing  is  to  teach  you  the  principles  and  rules^ 
according  to  which  the  spelling  and  emplojing  of  words 
ai'e  vai-ied  in  order  to  express  the  vaiious  circumstances 
attending  this  relationshij).  But,  before  I  enter  on  this 
pai't  of  my  instructions,  I  must  inform  you  that  there  are 
several  distinct  sorts  of  words,  or,  as  they  are  usually 
called,  Parts  of  Speech;  and  it  will  be  necessai-y  for  you 
to  be  able,  before  you  proceed  further,  to  distinguish  the 
words  belonging  to  each  of  these  Pai'ts  of  Speech  from 
those  belonging  to  the  other  parts.  Thex-e  ai'e  Nine 
Parts  of  Speech,  and  they  are  named  thus : 

ARTICLES,  NOUNS, 

PRONOUNS,  ADJECTrV^S, 

VERBS,  ADVERBS, 

PREPOSITIONS,  CONJUNCTIONS. 
INTKRJECTIONS. 


16  Etymology. 

12.  Before  the  sergeant  begins  to  teach  young  soldiers 
their  exercise  of  the  musket,  he  explains  to  them  the  dif- 
ferent pai-ts  of  it;  the  butt,  the  stock,  the  barrel,  the 
loops,  the  swivels,  and  so  on ;  because,  unless  they  know 
these  by  their  names,  they  cannot  know  how  to  obey  his 
instructions  in  the  handling  of  the  musket.  Sailors,  for 
the  same  reason,  are  told  which  is  the  tiller,  which  are  the 
yards,  which  the  shrouds,  which  the  tacks,  which  the 
sheets,  which  the  booms,  and  which  are  each  and  every 
pai't  of  the  shijD.  Apprentices  are  taught  the  names  of  all 
the  tools  used  in  their  trade ;  and  ploughboys  the  names 
of  the  various  implements  of  husbandry.  This  species  of 
preliminary  knowledge  is  absolutely  necessary  in  all  these 
callings  of  life ;  but  not  more  necessary  than  it  is  for  you 
to  leai'n,  before  you  go  any  fmther,  how  to  know  the  sorts 
oj^  words  one  from  another.  To  teach  you  this,  therefore, 
is  the  object  of  the  present  letter. 

13.  AKTICLES.  There  aie  but  three  in  our  language ; 
and  these  are,  the,  an,  and  a.  Indeed,  there  are  but  two, 
because  a7i  and  a  are  the  same  word,  the  latter  being 
only  an  abbreviation,  or  a  shortening,  of  the  former.  I 
shall,  by-and-by,  give  you  rules  for  the  using  of  these 
Articles ;  but  my  business  in  this  place  is  only  to  teach 
you  how  to  know  one  sort  of  words  fiom  another  sort  of 
words. 

14.  NOUNS.  The  word  Noun  means  name,  and 
nothing  more ;  and  JSfouns  are  the  names  of  persons  and 
things.  As  far  as  persons  and  other  animals  and  things 
that  we  can  see  go,  it  is  very  easy  to  distinguish  JVbims/ 
but  there  are  many  Nouns  which  express  what  we  can 
neither  see,  nor  heai",  nor  touch.  For  exami^le:  Con- 
science, Vanity,  Vice,  Sobriety,  Steadiness,  Valour;  and 
a  great  number  of  others.  Grammarians,  anxious  to  give 
some  easy  rule  by  which  the  scholar  might  distinguish 
Nouns  from  other  words,  have  directed  him  to  put  the 
words,  the  good,  before  any  word,  and  have  told  him  that» 


Parts  of  Speech.  17 

if  the  three  words  make  sense,  the  last  word  is  a  Noun. 
This  is  frequently  the  case;  as,  the  g;ood  house,  the  good 
dog;  but  the  good  sobriety  would  not  appear  to  be  very 
good  sense.  In  fact  there  is  no  rule  of  this  kind  that  will 
answer  the  pui'pose.  You  must  employ  your  mind  in 
order  to  arrive  at  the  knowledge  here  desued. 

15.  Every  word  which  stands  for  a  person  or  any  ani- 
mal, or  for  any  thing  of  substance,  dead  or  alive,  is  a 
Noun.  So  far  the  matter  is  very  easy.  Thus,  ')na7i,  cat, 
tree,  log,  aie  Nouns.  But  when  we  come  to  the  words 
which  ai'e  the  names  of  things,  and  which  things  are  not 
substances,  the  matter  is  not  so  easy,  and  it  requires  a 
little  sober  thought.  This  word  thought,  for  example,  i^ 
a  Noun. 

16.  The  only  siu-e  rrde  is  this :  that  a  word  which  stands 
for  any  thing  that  has  an  existence  is  a  Noun.  For  ex- 
ample: Pride,  Polly,  Thought,  Misery,  Truth,  False- 
hood, Opinion,  Sentiment.  None  of  these  have  any  sub- 
stance. You  cannot  see  them,  or  touch  them;  but  they 
all  have  an  existence.  They  all  exist  in  the  world;  and, 
therefore,  the  words  which  represent  them,  or  stand  for 
them,  are  called  Nouns.  If  you  be  still  a  little  puzzled 
here,  you  must  not  be  impatient.  You  will  find  the  diffi- 
culty disappear  in  a  short  time,  if  you  exert  your  powers 
of  thinking.  Ask  yourself  what  existence  means.  Yua 
will  find  that  the  words,  very,  for,  think,  but,  pretty,  do 
not  express  any  thing  which  has  an  existence,  or  a  being; 
but  that  the  words,  motive,  zeal,  pity,  kindness,  do  ex- 
press things  which  have  a  being,  or  existence. 

17.  PEONOUNS.  Words  of  this  sort  stand  in  the 
place  of  Nouns.  Theu*  name  is  fiom  the  Latm,  and  it 
means  For-nouns,  or  For-names;  that  is  to  say,  these 
words,  called  Pronouns,  are  used/b/-,  or  instead  of.  Nouns. 
Me,  She,  Her,  Him,  Who,  for  example,  are  Pronouns. 
The  use  of  them  is  to  prevent  the  repetition  of  Nouns, 
and  to  make  speakmg  and  WTiting  more  rapid  and  less 


18  Etytyiology. 

encumbered  witli  words.     An  example  will  make  this  clear 
to  you  in  a  minute.     Thus : 

18.  A  woman  went  to  a  man,  and  told  him  that  he,  was 
in  great  danger  of  being  murdered  by  a  gang  of  robbers. 
who  had  made  jjreparatious  for  attacking  him.  lie 
thanked  her  for  her  kindness,  and,  as  ^e  was  unable  to  de- 
fend himself,  he  left  his  house  and  went  to  a  neighbor's. 

19.  Now,  if  there  were  no  Pronouns,  this  sentence  must 
be  wi'itten  as  follows : — A  woman  went  to  a  man,  and  told 
the  m,an,  that  the  man  was  in  great  danger  of  being  miu'- 
dered  by  a  gang  of  robbers ;  as  a  gang  of  robbers  had 
made  preparations  for  attacking  the  man.  The  man 
thanked  the  xcoman  for  the  woman^s  kindness;  and  as  the 
man  was  unable  to  defend  the  man''s  self,  the  man  left 
the  man?s  house  and  went  to  a  neighbor's. 

20.  There  are  several  different  classes  of  Pronouns; 
but  of  this,  and  of  the  manner  of  using  Pronouns,  you 
will  be  informed  by-and-by.  All  that  I  aim  at  here  is  to 
enable  you  to  form  a  clear  idea  with  regard  to  the  differ- 
ence in  the  sorts  of  words,  or  Parts  of  Speech. 

21.  ADJECTIVES.  The  word  Adjective,  in  its  full, 
hteral  sense,  means  something  added  to  something  else. 
Therefore,  this  teiin  is  used  in  Grammar  as  the  name  of 
that  Part  of  Sj^eech  which  consists  of  words  which  are 
added,  or  put,  to  Nouns,  in  order  to  express  something 
relating  to  the  Nouns,  which  something  could  not  be  ex- 
jjressed  without  the  help  of  Adjectives.  For  instance, 
there  are  several  turkeys  in  the  yard,  some  black,  some 
white,  some  speckled ;  and,  then,  there  are  large  ones  and 
small  ones  of  all  the  colours.  I  want  you  to  go  and  catch 
a  turkey;  but  I  also  want  you  to  catch  a  white  turkey, 
and  not  only  a  white  tiu-key,  but  a  large  turkey.  There- 
fore, I  add,  or 2)ut  to  the  Noun,  the  words  white  and  large, 
which,  therefore,  ai"e  called  Adjectives. 

22.  Adjectives  sometimes  express  the  qualities  of  the 
Nouns,  to  wliich  they  are  put ;  and  this  being  very  fi-e- 


i"(»^.'(,5  oj  speech.  19 

quently  their  use,  some  grammaa-iaus  iiave  thrown  aside 
the  word  Adjectives,  and  have  called  words  of  this  sort, 
Qualities.  But  this  name  is  not  sufficiently  comprehen- 
,  sive ;  for  there  are  many  words  which  are  Adjectives 
which  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  qualifi  of  the  Nouns 
to  which  they  are  put.  Good  and  bad  express  qualities. 
but  long  and  short  meroly  express  dimension,  or  duratioa, 
p/ithout  giving-  any  intimation  as  to  ^he  quality  of  the 
things  expressed  by  the  Nouns  to  /hich  they  are  put; 
and  yet  lo7iff  and  short  are  4djectiyes  You  must  r3»d 
very  attentively  here,  and  consider  soberly.  You  .must 
I oep  in  mind  the  above  axplanp.tioa  of  the  meanincj  of  ihs 
Yord  Adjective;  and  if  yov  also  bear  in  mind  that  words 
1  i'  this  sort  always  express;  ^oms  quplity,  some  property, 
j:ome  app9?r«nc3.  or  some  distin^ri^s  circumstance,  be- 
longing tc  the  Nouns  to  which  +hej  jxe  put,  you  will  very 
easily,  r.nd  in  a  very  short  .^pace  of  time,  be  able  to  dis- 
tinguish an  Adjective  froiT;  vords  belonging  to  any  other 
Part  of  Speech. 

23.  VERBS.  'Grrammr.rip.nR  .,p'^::r  to  have  been  at  a 
loss  to  discover  a  suitable  appellation  for  this  important 
sort  of  words,  or  Pr.rt  of  Speech.;  for  the  word  T^erb 
means  nothing  more  than  Wo7  J^  In  the  Latin  it  is 
verbum,  in  the  French  it  is  'oer-hsj  and  the  French,  ixi 
tbeir  Bible,  say  Le  Verhe,  where  we  say  Th3  Word,  The 
truth  is  that  there  are  so  many  properties  and  circuiD- 
stances,  so  many  and  such  different  powers  and  functions, 
belonging  to  this  Part  of  Speech,  that  the  mine?,  of  maa  is 
imable  to  bring  the  whols  of  them  into  any  short  ?.nd  pre- 
cise description.  Thi3  5rst  gi-amm^.r  that  I  ever  looked 
into  told  me  that  "e.  Verb  is  a  word  which  signifies  to  do. 
to  be,  or  to  suffer.''''  Whst  was  J  to  understand  fi-om  this 
laconic  account? 

24.  Verbs  express  all  the  diflf  rsn'*^  ct'itiom  and  'move- 
fiients  of  all  creatures  and  of  all  things,  whether  alive  or 
dead.     As,  for  instance,  to  speak,  to  bark,  to  grow.^  to 


20  Etymology. 

moulder.,  to  crack,  to  crumble,  and  the  like.  In  aH  these 
cases  there  is  movement  clearly  vinderstood.  But  in  the 
cases  of,  to  think,  to  reflect,  to  remember,  to  like,  to  detest^ 
and  in  an  infinite  number  of  cases,  the  movem,ent  is  not  so 
easily  perceived.  Yet  these  ai'e  all  Verbs,  and  they  do 
indeed  express  tnovsments  which  we  attribute  to  the  tnind, 
or  the  heart.  But  what  shall  we  say  in  the  cases  of  to  sit, 
to  sleep,  to  rot,  and  the  like?     Still  these  are  all  Verbs. 

25.  Verbs  are,  then,  a  sort  of  words,  the  use  of  which 
is  to  express  the  actions,  the  movements,  and  the  state  or 
manner  of  being,  of  all  creatures  and  things,  whether  ani- 
mate or  inanimate.  In  speaking  with  reference  to  a  man, 
to  Jijht  is  an  action;  to  reflect  is  a  movement;  to  sit  is  a 
state  of  being. 

2G.  Of  the  manner  of  using  Verbs  you  will  hear  a  g^eat 
deal  by-aud-by;  but  wliat  I  have  nere  &-aid  will,  if  you 
read  attentively,  and  take  time  to  consider,  be  sufficient 
to  enable  you  to  distiaguish  Verbs  from  the  words  which 
belong  to  the  other  Parts  of  Si^eech. 

27.  ADVERBS  are  so  called  because  the  words  which 
belong  to  this  Part  of  Speech  ai'e  added  to  verbs.  But 
this  is  an  inadequate  descrij)tiou ;  for,  as  you  will  pi  es- 
ently  see,  they  aie  sometimes  otherwise  employed.  You 
have  seen  that  Verbs  express  actions,  m,ovem,ents,  and 
states  of  being/  and  it  is  very  frequently  the  use  of  Ad- 
verbs to  express  the  manner  of  actions,  movements,  and 
states  of  being.  Thus :  the  man  fights  bravely/  he  refiects 
profoundly/  he  sits  quietly.  In  these  instances  the  Ad- 
verbs pei'form  an  office,  and  aie  placed  in  a  situation, 
which  fully  justify  the  name  that  has  been  given  to  this 
sort  of  words.  But  there  are  many  Adverbs  which  do  not 
express  the  manner  of  actions,  movements,  or  states  of 
being,  and  which  are  not  added  to  verbs.  For  instance: 
"  When  you  sow  small  seeds,  make  the  earth  very  fine, 
and  if  it  have,  of  lute,  been  di.y  weather,  take  care  to 
press  the  earth  extremely  hard  upon  the  seeds."     Here 


Parts  of  Speech.  21 

are  four  Adverbs,  but  only  the  last  of  the  four  expresses 
any  thing  connecteJ  with  a  verb.  This  shows  that  the 
name  of  this  class  of  words  does  not  fully  convey  to  our 
minds  a  description  of  their  use. 

28.  However,  with  this  name  you  must  be  content; 
but  you  must  bear  in  mind  that  there  are  Adverbs  of 
time,  of  place,  and  of  degree,  as  well  as  of  manner ;  and 
that  their  business  is  to  expi'ess,  or  describe,  some  circum- 
stances in  addition  to  all  that  is  expressed  by  the  Nouns, 
Adjectives,  and  Verbs.  In  the  above  sentence,  for  ex- 
ample, the  words  when,  very,  of  late,  and  extremely,  add 
greatly  to  the  precept,  which,  without  them,  would  lose 
much  of  its  force. 

29.  PREPOSITIONS.  The  Prepositions  ai'e,  in,  to, 
for,  from,  of,  by,  with,  into,  against,  at,  and  several  others. 
They  are  called  Prepositions  from  two  Latin  words,  mean- 
ing before  and  place;  and  this  name  is  given  them  be- 
cause they  ai'e  iu  most  cases  placed  before  Nouns  and 
Pronouns ;  as,  "  Indian  corn  is  sown  in  May.  I)i  June, 
and  the  three  following  months,  it  is  carefully  cultivated. 
When  ripe,  in  October,  it  is  gathered  in  the  field,  by  men 
who  go  from  liill  to  hLl  with  baskets,  into  which  they  put 
the  eai's.  The  leaves  and  stalks  are  then  collected  for 
winter  use ;  and  they  not  only  serve  as  food  for  cattle 
and  sheep,  but  are  excellent  in  the  making  of  sheds  to 
protect  a-iimals  against  the  inclemency  of  the  weather." 

30.  Prepositions  ai'e  not  very  numerous,  and,  though 
you  WL.1  be  taught  to  be  very  careful  in  using  them,  tae 
above  sentence  will  be  quite  sulHcient  to  enable  yoa  to 
know  the  words  belonging  to  this  Part  of  Speech  from 
the  words  belonging  to  aay  other  Part  of  Speech. 

Notice  that  the  word  is  from  "prae,"  before,  and  "positio,** 
a  placing.  Now  take  aay  article  of  farulLu/e  ucar  you — the 
desk,  for  instance — and  think  of  all  t.u  rela!,u)ns  of  position  with 
regard  to  it  and  somethin^;  else.  Tno  book  \i  in  the  desk,  on  the 
desk,  over  the  desk,  above,  under,  beneaih  or  below  the  desk,  near 


22  Etymology. 

the  desk,  against  the  desk,  hedde  the  desk,  within  or  without  the 
desk,  and  so  on.  Still,  other  relations  are  sometimes  expressed 
by  prepositions  as  well  as  that  of  position;  as,  by  the  desk,  of  the 
desk,  to  the  desk,  for  the  desk ;  but  the  majority  of  them  show 
some  relation  of  position  between  things  and  actions,  or  between 
persons  and  actions,  or  between  things  and  states.  This  word 
between,  for  instance,  is  a  preposition.  Like  other  words  used  in 
grammar,  its  name,  preposition,  does  not  express  completely  the  true 
nature  of  it. 

31.  CONJUNCTIONS  are  so  called  because  they  con- 
join, or  join  together,  words,  or  parts  of  sentences ;  as, 
"Peas  awf?  beans  maybe  severed  from  the  groand  before 
they  be  quite  dry ;  but  they  must  not  be  put  into  sacks  or 
barns  until  perfectly  dry, /or,  if  they  be,  they  will  mould." 
The  word  a7id  joins  together  the  words  peas  and  beans, 
and,  by  the  means  of  this  junction,  makes  all  the  remain- 
ing part  of  the  sentence  apply  to  both.  The  word  hut 
connects  the  fii'st  with  the  Bccond  member  of  the  sen- 
tence. The  wordybr,  which  is  sometimes  a  Conjunction, 
performs,  in  this  case,  the  same  office  as  the  word  hut :  it 
continues  the  connection ;  and  thus  does  every  part  of  the 
sentence  apply  to  each  of  the  two  nouns  which  are  the 
subject  of  it. 

What  a  deal  of  useless  learning  we  find  in  the  ordinary  gram- 
mars about  this  simple  matter  of  conjunctions!  They  speak  of 
conjunctions  which  are  mere  connectives,  of  co-ordinate  and  sub- 
ordinate connectives,  of  copulative,  adversative,  and  alternative 
conjunctions ;  then  of  subordinate  connectives  which  join  hetero- 
geneous elements,  and  these  subordinate  connectives  again  divided 
into  those  which  unite  substantive  clauses,  those  which  unite 
^adjective  clauses,  and  those  which  unite  adverbial  clauses !  What 
,are  children  to  make  of  all  these  hard  words?  Or,  supposing  they 
are  made  to  understand  the  words,  will  it  enable  them  to  use  the 
word  and,  for  instance,  more  correctly  by  informing  them  that  it 
Is  a  copulative  conjunction? 

32.  INTERJECTIONS.  This  name  comes  from  two 
Latin  words :  inter,  which  means  hetv^eeti,  axid  jectio,  which 
means  somethitig  throwii.     So  that  the  full,  literal  mean- 


Parts  of  Speech.  23 

ing  of  the  word  is  somethmg  thrown  hetmeen.  The  Inter- 
jections ai'e  Ah!  Oh!  Alas!  and  such  like,  which,  in- 
deed, are  not  words,  because  they  have  no  definite  meaning. 
They  are  mere  sou?ids,  and  they  have  been  mentioned  by 
me  merely  because  other  grammarians  have  considered 
them  as  being  a  Part  of  Sf)eech.  But  this  one  notice  of 
them  will  be  quite  sufl&cient. 

Here  Cobbett's  defective  knowledge  of  Latin  crops  out,  for  jectia 
does  not  mean  something  throion,  but  merely  the  aft  of  thromng. 
But  be  is  quite  right  in  setting  down  interjections  as  forming  no 
part  of  grammar.  A  writer  in  Chambers's  Encyclopedia  hits  the 
mark  still  more  elTectively  when  he  says  tbat"they  are,  in  fact, 
more  akin  to  the  sounds  emitted  by  the  lower  animals  than  to  artic- 
ulate speech."  Yet  most  grammarians  take  the  trouble  to  set  them 
down  in  classes,  those  that  express  surprise,  those  that  express 
fear,  and  so  on  ;  as  if  the  veriest  boor  that  ever  hopped  over  a  clod 
would  not  know  how  to  utter  an  exclamation  expressing  fear  or 
surprise  when  he  felt  it !  It  is  something  like  the  Irishman's 
"  teaching  ducks  to  swim." 

33.  Thus,  then,  you  are  now  able  to  distinguish,  in 
many  cases  at  least,  to  what  Part  of  Speech  belongs  each 
of  the  several  words  which  may  come  under  your  observa- 
tion. I  shall  now  proceed  to  the  Etymology  of  each  of 
these  Pai-ts  of  Speech.  As  we  have  done  with  the  Inter- 
jections, there  will  remain  only  eight  Parts  to  treat  of, 
and  this  I  shall  do  in  eight  Letters,  allotting  one  Leiter 
to  each  Part  of  Speech. 

Here  it  seems  proper  to  say  to  the  thoughtful  scholar  that  a  word 
may  (as  remarked  by  Mr.  White)  belong  to  almost  any  part  of 
speech,  according  to  its  use.  We  say  dog  is  a  noun ;  and  so  it  is 
when  it  means  an  animal  of  the  dog  species;  but  it  may  be  a  verb 
or  an  adjective ;  as,  he  will  dog  me  to  my  home ;  here  is  a  dog  cart. 
In  this  very  phrase,  "dog  species,"  it  is  an  adjective.  Take, 
again,  the  word  but.  I  will  give  it  to  you  of  four  different  parts 
of  speech  in  four  different  senses.  "I  will  go,  b^ut  1  will  return. 
He  is  but  five  years  old.  The  goat  will  but  his  head  against  you. 
He  always  has  a  but  in  his  sayings."  And  the  word  could  no 
doubt  be  used  in  still  other  parts  of  speecli.  If  you  cannot  make 
these  out  now,  wait  a  little ;  you  will  be  able  to  do  so  by  ;vud-by. 


24:  Etymology 

Spelled  with  two  t's,  there  are  three  different  hiUs,  with  three 
different  meanings ;  the  butt  of  ri Jicule,  the  butt  of  a  segar,  the 
butt  of  wine.  Then,  again,  a  word  may  be  of  two  different  parts 
of  speech  with  a  different  accent,  as,  I  re-cord'  the  deed ;  this  is  the 
rec'-ord.  You  see,  therefore,  every  thing  depends  on  the  sense  or 
the  use  made  of  a  word ;  and  you  see,  too,  the  utter  uselessness  of 
learning  by  heart  instead  of  by  reason.  la  learning  any  art  or 
ecieuce,  aa  ounce  of  understanding  is  worth  a  ton  of  memory. 


LETTER    IV. 

ettmologt  of  articles. 

My  dear  James: 

34.  In  Letter  III.,  paragraph  13,  you  have  seen  what 
sort  of  words  Articles  are ;  thj,t  is  oo  say,  you  have  there 
.earned  how  to  distinguish  the  words  belonging  to  this 
Pai't  of  Speech  from  words  belonging  to  other  Parts  of 
Speech.  You  must  nov/  turn  to  Letter  II.,  paragraph  8. 
Having  read  what  you  find  there  under  the  head  of  J^iy- 
mology,  you  will  see  at  once,  that  my  business,  in  this 
present  Letter,  is  to  teach  you  those  principles  and  rules 
according  to  which  Articles  are  varied  in  order  to  make 
them  suit  the  different  circumstances  which  they  are  used 
to  express. 

35.  You  have  seen  that  there  are  but  three  Articles, 
namely,  A  or  AN,  and  THE.  The  two  foi'mer  are,  in  fact, 
the  same  word,  but  of  this  I  shall  say  more  presently. 
They  are  called  indefinite  Articles,  because  they  do  not 

'  define,  or  determine,  what  pai'ticular  object  is  spoken  of. 

-^  The  Nouns,  to  which  they  ai'e  prefixed,  only  serve  to  point 
out  the  sort  of  person  or  thing  spoken  of,  without  defin- 
ing what  person  or  what  thing ;  as,  a  tree  is  hlowed  doion. 
From  this  we  learn  that  some  tree  is  bio  wed  down,  bat 
2jo\,  what  tree.  But  the  definite  Article  THE  determines 
the  particular  object  of  which  we  speak ;  as,  the  tree  which 


Of  Articres^  25 

stood  close  beside  the  barn  is  blowed  down.  In  this  last 
instance,  we  ai'e  not  only  informed  that  a  tree  is  blowed 
down,  but  the  sentence  also  informs  us  what  particular 
tree  it  is.  This  Article  is  used  before  nouns  in  the  plural 
aa  well  as  before  nouns  in  the  singular  number.  It  is 
sometimes  used  before  words  expressive  of  degrees  of 
comparison ;  as,  the  best,  the  worst,  the  highest,  the  lowest. 
When  we  use  a  noun  in  the  singular  number  to  express  a 
whole  species,  or  sort,  we  use  the  definite  Article ;  thus, 
we  say,  the  oak  is  a  fine  tree,  when  we  mean  that  oaks  are 
fine  trees. 

36.  The  Article  A  becomes  AN  when  this  Ai'ticle  comes 
immediately  before  wty  word  w^hich  begins  with  a  voioel 
This  is  for  the  sake  of  the  sound,  as  aji  adder,  an  elephant^ 
an  hiK  h,  an  oily  seed,  an  ugly  hat.  The  word  an  is  also 
used  before  words  which  begin  with  an  h  which  is  mute  j 
that  is  to  say,  which,  though  used  in  writing,  is  n<A 
sounded  in  speaking ;  as,  a7i  hour.  This  little  variation  in 
the  article  is,  as  I  said  before,  for  the  sake  of  the  sound; 
for  it  would  be  very  disagreeable  to  say,  a  adder,  a  ele- 
phant, a  inch,  a  oily  seed,  a  ugly  hat,  a  hour,  and  the 
like.  But  a  is  used  in  the  usual  way  before  words  which 
begin  w^ith  an  h  which  is  sounded  in  speaking ;  as,  a  horse, 
a  hair,  and  the  like.  The  mdefinite  Article  can  be  used 
before  nouns  in  the  singular  number  only.  There  is  a 
seeming  exception  to  this  rule  in  cases  where  the  words 
few  and  m.any  come  before  the  noun;  as,  Q,few  horses;  a 
(jreat  many  horses ;  but,  in  reality,  this  is  not  an  excep- 
tion, because  the  words  feto  and  many  mean  number ; 
thus,  a  small  number  of  horses,  a  great  number  of  horses; 
and  the  indefinite  Article  agrees  with  this  word  number^ 
which  is  understood,  and  which  is  in  the  singular. 

It  is  remarkable  that  a  man  of  Cobbett's  discernment  did  not  see 

through  a  certain  inconsistency  in  the  strict  or  literal  application 

of  this  rule,  the  more  especially  as  he  explicitly  declares  that  the 

change  is  made  tor  the  sake  of  tlie  sound.    He,  like  a  thousaod 

2 


26  IStymology 

o&ers  to  tlie  present  d&y,  folhxTed  out  the  letter  of  the  rule  and 
violated  its  spirit.  5'or  a  word  may  begin  with  a  vowel  and  yet 
have  a  oonsonani  sciyid;  and  in  'his  case  the  article  must  not  be 
changed.  Does  li  not  sound  mii.^h  better  to  say,  "a  useful  book," 
than  "an  useful  book?"  "such  a  one,"  than  "such  an  one?"  And 
is  will  be  3eer'  'hat  when  we  say  a  useful  book,  a  one,  a  union,  a 
ewe,  a  European,  and  the  like,  we  really  conform  to  the  spii-it  cf 
the  rule ;  foi  in  all  these  cases  the  words  begin  with  the  SOUND 
of  a  consonant ;  as>  3  yuseful  book,  a  wone,  a  yunion,  a  yewe,  a 
yeuropean. 

And  this  also  clearly  illr  otrates  something  else  that  has  been  left 
mysteriously  Indefinite  in  many  grammars :  "The  vowels  are  a,  e, 
i,  0,  u,  and  sometimes  u  and  ?/."  Wh?/:  a  puzzle  this  used  to  be  to 
me  in  my  grammar-studying  dttys!  There  was  the  rule,  plain 
enough;  but  iclien  w  and  y  were  cor.Gonants,  I  knew  no  more 
than  the  man  in  the  iKOon!  I  suppose  tliat  these  writers  of  gram- 
mars repeat  this  rule,  one  s^ter  another,  without  knowing  anything 
about  it  them.selves.  Now  tlie  reason  here  given  why  tlie  indefinite 
article  must  remain  unchanged  before  words  beginning  with  a 
vowel  and  having  a  y  or  V3  sound,  explains  the  whole  matter; 
namely^  that  y  and  vi  at  the  ibginning  of  a  syllable  are  consonants 
but  in  the  middle  or  at  the  snd  of  a  syllable  are  vowels.  In  the 
word  sympathy,  for  instance,  both  y's  are  vowels,  because  they  are 
equal  to  ?''«/  in  the  word  ye&terday,  the  first  is  a  consonant,  and  the 
second  a  vowel.  It  is  precisely  the  same  with  the  w;  in  the  words 
new.,  few,  pew,  the  w'c  are  vowels,  being  equal  to  u's;  in  the 
word  window,  the  first  is  a  consonfint  :-.nd  the  second  a  vowel. 

J3ut  vhere  is  another  rule  concerning  words  beginning  with  h,  a 
rule  of  which  Cobbett  and  many  othe:  ^J^riters  of  his  day  seem  to 
have  been  unaware — although  I  have  ao  lioubt  they  unconsciously 
obeyed  it — which  is  also  formed  for  the  .-/;.-.'.  of  the  sound.  In  these 
four  words,  for  instance,  Imtory,  historical,  hero,  heroic,,  the  h  is  uni- 
formly sounded;  or  aspirated.  Yet  we  say  an  liistcHcol  fact,  an 
heroic poein,  a  Imtory ,  ■:.  hero,  How  does  this  come?  It  is  because 
we  must  say  an  before  words  beginning  with  ,1  jspirate>  when  the 
accent  of  such  zoordsf-  'Is  on  the  second  syllable,  'That  is  the  rule. 
Say,  therefore,  an  hotel,  an  hereditary  prin's  and  not.  as  r?:^auy  do, 
a  Iwtel,  a  hereditary  prince;  for  the  forme*   ■junds  . letter. 

I  may  here  add  that  the  tendency  now-a-days  is  to  sound  tlie  /* 
in  some  words  in  which  it  was  formerly  silent :  a  humble  man, 
a  hospital,  a  hostler.  I  suppose  Dickens's  Uriah  Heep  has  made 
most  people  disgusted  with  "an  'umble  man."     And  it  is  perhaps 


Of  Nouns.  ^11 

•worth  remarking  here  that  many  Americans  make  u  serious 
mistake  when  they  believe  that  all  Englishmen  drop  their  aitches, 
and  put  them  iu  where  they  ought  uot  to  do  so.  Tlie  latter  is 
never  done  by  anybody  in  England  but  illiterate  Londoners,  and 
the  former  seldom  by  Englishmen  of  any  culture. 

I  notice  that  recent  grammarians  follow  Noah  Webster  in  setting 
down  articles  as  adjectives.  It  is  true  that  these  words  always 
modify  nouns  in  some  way;  but  I  see  no  advantage  in  setting  them 
down  among  a  class  of  words  which  generally  signify  the  kind  or 
quality  of  things,  thus  rendering  the  adjective  itself  all  the  more 
difficult  to  define.  Besides,  the  articles  have  characteristics  en- 
tirely their  own,  which  can  be  remembered  the  better  by  keeping 
tiiem  apart.     We  shall  see  this  mojte  clearly  by-and-by. 


LETTER    V. 

ETYMOLOGY    V>1>    K0UN3. 

37.  This,  my  dear  James,  is  a  Letter  of  great  impo3 1- 
rjice,  and,  therefore,  it  will  requiie  great  attcBtion  from 
jou.  Before  you  proceed  further,  you  will  again  look 
well  at  Letter  II.,  paragraph  8,  and  Letter  III.,  pai-a- 
^^raphs  14,  15,  and  16,  and  there  read  carefully  everything 
imder  the  head  of  Nouns. 

38.  Now,  then,  as  Letter  HI.  has  taught  you  how  to 
flistinguish  Nouns  from  the  words  which  belong  to  the 
other  Parts  of  Speech,  the  business  here  is  to  teach  you 
the  principles  and  rules  according  to  which  Nouns  are  to 
be  vaiied  in  the  letters  of  which  they  are  composed,  ac- 
cording to  which  they  are  to  be  used,  and  according  to 
which  they  are  to  be  considered  in  their  bearings  upon 
other  words  in  the  sentences  in  which  they  are  used. 

39.  In  a  Noun  there  arc  to  be  considered  the  braixches^ 
the  iiuinbers,  the  geiiders,  and  the  cases;  and  all  these, 
must  be  attended  to  very  carefully. 

40.  THE  BRANCHES.    There  are  two ;  for  Nouns  are 


28  Etymology 

Bome  of  tliem  proper  and  some  common.  A  Noun  is  called 
proper  when  it  is  used  to  distinguish  one  particular  indi- 
vidual from  the  rest  of  the  individuals  of  the  same  species 
or  kind;  as  James,  JBotley,  Hampshire.  The  Noun  is 
called  com.tnon  when  it  applies  to  all  the  individuals  of  a 
kind;  as,  man,  village,  county.  Botley  is  a  proper  Noun, 
because  all  villages  have  not  this  name ;  but  village  is  a 
common  noun,  because  all  villages  are  called  by  that 
name :  the  name  is  common  to  them  all.  Several  persons 
have  the  name  of  James,  to  be  sure,  and  there  is  a  Ilam^p- 
shire  in  America  as  well  as  in  England;  but,  still,  these 
are  proper  names,  because  the  former  is  not  common  to 
all  men,  nor  the  latter  to  all  counties.  Proper  Nouns 
take  no  articles  before  them,  because  the  extent  of  their 
meaning  is  clearly  pointed  out  in  the  word  itself.  In  fig- 
urative language,  of  which  you  will  know  more  by-and-by, 
we  sometimes,  however,  use  the  article ;  as,  "  Goldsmith 
is  a  very  pretty  poet,  but  not  to  be  compai'ed  to  the  Popes, 
the  Drydens,  or  the  Otways."  And  again;  "I  wish  I  had 
the  wit  of  a  Swift.''''  We  also  use  the  definite  article  be- 
fore proper  Nouns  when  a  common  Noun  is  understood 
to  be  left  out ;  as,  l^he  Delaware,  meaning  the  Hiver  Del- 
aware. Also  when  we  speak  of  more  than  one  person  of 
the  same  name ;  as,  the  Henries,  the  Edwards. 

A  very  importaut  difference  in  the  use  of  proper  and 
common  nouns  is,  that  the  former  are  written  with  a  capital 
letter,  and  the  latter  are  not.  This  is  the  general  rule,  and  it  is 
generally  observed ;  but  some  writers  begin  every  word  they  think 
important  with  a  capital  letter,  and  nobody  is  more  peculiar  in 
this  respect  than  Cobbett  himself.  He  writes  noun,  you  see,  with 
a  capital,  although  it  is  a  common  noun.  Formerly  every  noun 
u«ed  to  be  written  with  a  capital  letter,  as  is  done  in  German  till 
this  day.  Thomas  Carlyle  is  another  singular  punctuator  and 
capitalizer ;  but  he  is  singular  in  all  things. 

41.  THE  NUMBERS.  These  ai-e  the  Singular  and 
the  Plural.  The  Singular  is  the  original  word ;  and,  in 
general,  the  Plxiral  id  formed  by  adding  an  s  to  the  singu- 


Of  Nouns.  29 

lar,  as  dog^  dogs.  But  though  the  greater  pai't  of  our 
Nouns  form  their  plui'als  from  the  singular  in  this  simple 
manner,  there  are  many  which  do  not ;  while  there  are 
some  Nouns  which  have  no  plui'al  number  at  all,  and  some 
which  have  no  singulai".  Therefore,  considering  the  above 
to  be  the  First  Kule,  I  shall  add  other  rides  with  regard 
to  the  Norms  which  do  not  follow  that  Rule. — The  Second 
Rule.  Nouns,  the  singular  numbers  of  which  end  in  chy 
s,  sh,  or  X,  requii-e  es  to  be  added  in  order  to  form  their 
plural  number;  as,  church,  churches;  brush,  brushes/ 
lass,  lasses  ;  fox,  foxes. — The  Thikd  Rule  is  that  Nouns 
which  end  in  y,  when  the  y  has  a  consonant  coming  im- 
mediately before  it,  change  the  y  into  ies  in  forming  their 
plui'als;  as,  quantity,  quantities.  But  you  must  mind 
that  if  the  y  be  not  immediately  preceded  by  a  consonant, 
the  words  follow  the  First  Mule,  and  take  only  an  s  in 
addition  to  theii*  singular ;  as,  day,  days.  I  am  the  more 
anxious  to  guai'd  yoa  against  error  as  to  this  matter,  be- 
cause it  is  very  common  to  see  men  of  high  rank  and  pro- 
fession writing  vallies,  vollies,  attornies,  correspondencies, 
conveniencies,  and  the  like,  and  yet  all  these  are  erroneous. 
Correspondence  and  inconvenience  should  have  simply  an 
s;  for  they  end  in  e,  and  not  in  y. — The  Fourth  Rule  is, 
that  Novms  which  end  in.  a  single  /,  or  ia  fe,  form  their 
plurals  by  changing  the/,  orfe,  into  ves;  as,  loaf,  loaves/ 
wife,  wives.  But  this  rule  has  exceptions,  in  the  following 
words,  which  follow  the  First  Mule  :  Dwarf,  scarf,  mis- 
chief, handkerchief,  chief,  relief,  grief  and  others.  The 
two  last  ai-e  seldom  used  in  the  plural  number ;  but,  as 
they  sometimes  are,  I  have  included  them. — The  Fifth 
Rule  is,  that  the  following  Nouns  have  then-  plui'al  in  en/ 
man,  tnen/  woma?i,  women/  ox,  oxen;  child,  children. 
And  brethren  is  sometimes  used  as  the  plural  of  brother. — 
The  SncTH  Rule  is,  that  all  which  nature,  or  art,  or  habit, 
has  made  plural,  have  no  singular ;  as,  ashes,  annals,  bel- 
lows, bowels,  thanks,   breeches,   entrails,  lungs,  scissors. 


30  Etymology 

snuffers,  tongs,  wages,  and  some  others.  There  are  also 
some  Nouns  which  have  no  plurals,  such  as  those  which 
express  the  qualities,  or  propensities,  or  feelings,  of  the 
mind  or  Ii&art;  as,  honesty,  meekness,  compassion.  There 
are,  further,  several  names  of  herbs,  metals,  minerals, 
liquids,  and  of  fleshy  substances,  which  have  no  plurals ; 
to  which  may  be  added  the  names  of  almost  all  soi"ts  of 
grain.  Thsre  are  exceptions  here;  for  while  icheat  has 
no  plural,  oats  has  seldom  any  singular.  But  all  these 
words,  and  others  ^yhich  are  in-cgular,  in  a  similai'  ^■:t:j- 
are  of  such  very  common  use  that  you  will  hardly  ever 
make  a  mistaLo  in  applying  them ;  for  I  vdll  not  suppose 
it  possible  for  my  dear  James  to  fall  into  either  the  com- 
pany or  the  language  of  those  who  talk,  and  even  write, 
about  larleys,  wheats,  clovers,  flours,,  grasses,  and  malts. 
There  remain  to  be  noticed,  however,  p.ome  words  which  are 
too  iiTegular  in  the  forming  of  the:r  plui-als  to  be  brought 
under  any  distinct  head  even  of  irregularity.  I  will, 
therefore,  insert  these  as  they  are  used  in  both  numbers 


6ISGDLAR. 

PLUK.^.L. 

sn-:uvr.AB. 

I'LUKAL. 

J3ie, 

Dice, 

Goose, 

Geese. 

Mouse, 

Kice, 

Penny, 

Pence, 

Louse, 

Lice, 

Tooth, 

Teeth, 

Deer, 

Deer, 

Foot, 

Feet. 

Die,  dhe.    Tlaic  is  the  little  cubic  implement  of  the  gamester ; 
but  the  more  worthy  implement  of  the  die-sinker  is  regular;  die,  ; 
dies.     You  must  not  confound  this  with  the  dtjs  and  dyes  of  the  ' 
dyer.     It  is  customary  to  change  penny  to  pence  when  speaking  of  _■ 
a  sum  of  money ;  but,  in  speaking  of  penny-pieces,  the  word  is  ■ 
regular;  as,  I  have  a  pocketful  of  pennies.     By-the-bye,  all  such 
words  as  this  word  pocketful &tc  also  regular;  three pocketfuls,  four  ; 
spoonfuU,  live  aliovelfuls.     Tluee  pocketsful  would  be  quite  another 
thing.     Then  again,  we  must,  from  the  nature  of  the  words,  say 
mothers-in-law,  coiisins-german,  courts-martial;  for  the  words  i/i-tow, 
german,   and  martial,    are   adjectives   or  qualifying   words,  and 
adjectives,  in  English,  never  make  any  change  to  express  number. 
EngUshm.an  and  Frenchman  become  Englishmen  and  Frenchmen  - 


Of  Nouns.  31 

but  not  all  the  nationalities  ending  in  man  become  r,-,an;  there  are 
the  Romans,  the  Normans,  and  the  Ge7inans,  brave  manly  races, 
no  doubt,  but  who  will  say  'that  the  Mu8sv,lmzns,  Tvjrlcomam 
and  Ottomans  deserve  to  be  called  men? 

Most  of  the  nouns  ending  in  o,  add  es  to  form  the  plural ;  as, 
negro,  negroes.  There  are  only  a  few  exceptions;  as,  folio, 
quarto,  duodecimo,  piano,  nuncio,  cameo,  which  follow  the  general 
rule.  I  think  it  useless  to  mention  eveij  one  of  the  excep- 
tions ;  for,  in  the  fi"3t  place,  usage  is  gradually  changing  the  form 
of  some  of  these  words  (motto,  portico);  and,  in  the  eecond  place, 
the  reader  can  always,  when  necessary,  find  the  desired  informa- 
tion by  reference  to  the  dictionary.  "  I  always  did  admire  that 
speech!"  were  the  carcastic  \7crds  of  Mr.  Butler  in  reply  to  one 
of  Mr.  Bingham's  speeches.  I  may  say  the  same  thing,  unsarcasti- 
cally,  of  the  reply  of  a  young  candidate  for  the  bar,  who,  on  using 
asked  some  isolated,  unimportant  question,  said,  "I  could  find 
that  out  in  two  minutea  by  reference  to  an  encyclopedia." 

There  are  some  nouns,  with  a  plural  form  but  a  singular  mean- 
ing, that  nre  always  used  in  the  singular.  "The  molassea  is 
sticky.  The  mea^sles  is  spreading.  What  is  the  neic^f  He  has 
made  a  r.nries  of  blunders.  The  pains  he  has  taken  to  repr.ir  them 
is  remarkable.  Mathematics  (physics,  optics,  &c.)  is  an  interesting 
science."  Look,  therefore,  to  the  meaning  and  not  ihcforvi  of  the 
word. 

Deer,  sheep,  swine,  vei'min,  are  the  came  in  both  singular  and 
plural ;  but  snipe,  trout,  salmon,  fish,  and  the  like,  become  plural 
when  number  is  signified,  and  singular  when  quantity  is  signified. 
' '  Here  are  two  snipes ;  I  have  shot  a  quantity  of  snipe.  Here  are 
three  fishes,  three  salmons ;  I  have  caught  a  lot  of  fish,  of  salmon." 
Dozen  s.nd.  pair  are  used  like  hundred  and  thousand;  that  is,  singu- 
lar with  any  other  number,  but  plural  without  any  other  number. 
"I  saw  d<}zens  of  those  creatures;  they  walked  in  prnrs;  IshcL  five 
dozen  partridges  and  bought  six  pair  of  pigeons.  Five  hundred 
men;   there  were  hundreds  of  men." 

In  some  compound  nouns,  both  parts  are  nirids  plural:  man- 
servant, men-servants;  woman-servant,  women-servants;  knight- 
templar,  knights-templars.  To  prevent  a  confusion  of  things,  we 
must  add  's  to  figures  and  letters  to  indicate  th?  plural:  "I  want 
three  5's  and  four  6's.  Mind  your  p's  and  q>,  t.nd  dot  your  i'a." 
There  are  a  number  of  names  of  persons  and  things  in  war  affairs 
that  do  not  make  any  change  for  the  plural ;  as, 
300  foot  (meaning  foot-soldiers,  or  inf-ir-t'-"^ 


32  Etymology 

400  horse  (meaning  horse-soldiers,  or  cavalry). 

100  cannon ;  although  we  also  say,  many  cannons ;   a  number 
of  cannons. 

500  head  (of  cattle). 

40  yoke  of  oxen. 

50  sail  (meaning  ships). 
Tliis  is  a  practice  that  seems  to  come  from  the  German  language, 
in  which  words  of  measure  or  quantity  do  not,  generally,  change 
to  indicate  plurality.     Drel  Pfund,  zeha  Fuss,  vier  Zoll. 

Among  proper  nouns,  the  only  peculiarity  is  one  concerning 
the  young  ladies ;  for  in  speaking  of  them,  you  may  give  their 
title  or  their  name  the  sign  of  the  plural ;  you  may  say,  the  Misses 
Campbell  or  the  Miss  Campbells,  just  as  you  please.  The  latter  is, 
I  think,  the  more  common  usage,  and  the  one  that  is  likely  to 
prevail ;  for  it  is  more  natural  than  the  former,  and  prevents  con- 
founding the  young  ladies  with  their  mamma,  Mrs.  Campbell. 
(How  is  it,  by -the- way,  that  most  of  the  children  in  this  country 
say  mam'ma  and  pap'a  instead  of  mam-ma'  and  pa-pa',  which  is  the 
proper  pronunciation  ?)  In  addressing  people,  in  conversation,  we 
say  sir  to  one  person,  and  gentleman  to  several ;  miss  (or  Miss  So- 
and-So)  to  one,  and  ladies  to  several.  Good  morning,  sir.  Good 
morning,  gentlemen.  Good  morning,  miss  (or  Miss  Jennie). 
Good  morning,  ladies.  And  here  let  me  throw  in,  without  any 
extra  charge,  a  bit  of  information  for  my  young  reader,  which  has 
something  to  do  with  politeness  as  well  as  with  grammar;  namely, 
that  when  you  meet  two  persons  in  the  street,  only  one  of  whom 
you  know,  it  is  proper  for  you  to  address  both  while  saluting 
them :  Good  morning,  gentlemen. 

Just  as  the  girls  get  Miss,  the  boys  ought  to  get  Master.  This, 
however,  is  more  common  in  England  than  in  this  country.  There 
the  school-boy  gets  sounder  floggings  than  he  does  here ;  but  they 
don't  rob  him  of  his  title;  he  is  still  Master  Charles  or  Master 
Willie,  even  if  he  be  flogged  eveiy  day. 

42.  THE  GENDERS.  In  the  French  language,  and 
many  other  languages,  every  Noun  is  of  the  masculine  or 
of  the  feminine  gender.  Jla^id,  for  instance,  is  of  the 
feminine,  and  arm  of  the  masculine ;  ps7i  of  the  feminine, 
auidpaper  of  the  masculine.  This  is  not  the  case  with  our 
language,  which,  in  this  respect,  has  followed  the  order 
of  nature.    Tne  names  of  ail  males  are  of  the  mascuhue 


Of  Nouns.  33 

gender;  the  names  of  viSS.  females  are  of  the  feminine  gen- 
der; an  J  all  other  Nouns  aie  of  the  neuter  gender.  And 
you  must  observe  that,  even  in  speaking  of  living  crea- 
tures, of  which  we  do  not  know  the  gender,  we  consider 
them  to  be  of  the  neuter.  In  strictness  of  language,  we 
could  not,  perhaps,  apply  the  term  gender  to  things  desti- 
tute of  all  sexual  properties  ;  but,  as  it  is  applied  with 
perfect  propriety  in  the  case  of  males  and  females,  and  as 
the  application  in  the  case  of  inanimate  or  vegetable  mat- 
ter can  lead  to  no  grammatical  error,  I  have  thought  it 
best  to  follow,  in  this  respect,  the  example  of  other  gram- 
maiians.  It  may  be  said  that  the  rule  which  I  have  here 
laid  down  as  being  without  any  exception,  has  many  ex- 
ceptions ;  for  that,  in  speaking  of  a  ship,  we  say  she  and 
her.  And  you  know  our  country  folks  in  Hampshire  call 
almost  everything  he  or  she.  Sailors  have,  for  ages,  called 
their  vessels  shes.,  and  it  has  been  found  easier  to  adopt 
than  to  eradicate  the  vulgarism,  which  is  not  only  tolerated 
but  cherished  by  that  just  admiration  in  which  our  country 
holds  the  species  of  skill  and  of  valor  to  which  it  owes 
much  of  its  greatness  and  renown.  It  is  curious  t  j  ob- 
serve that  country  laborers  give  the  feminine  appellations 
to  those  things  only  which  ai'e  more  closely  identified 
■with  themselves,  and  by  the  qualities  and  condition  of 
which  their  own  efforts  and  their  character  as  workmen 
are  affected.  The  mower  calls  his  scythe  a  she;  the 
ploughman  calls  his  plough  a  she;  but  a  prong,  or  a 
shovel,  or  a  harrow,  which  passes  promiscuously  fi*om 
hand  to  hand,  and  which  is  appropriated  to  no  particular 
laborer,  is  called  a  he.  It  was,  doubtless,  from  this  sort 
of  habitual  attachment  that  our  famous  mai'itime  solecism 
arose.  The  deeds  of  laborers  in  the  fields  and  of  ai'tizans 
in  their  shops  ai'e  not  of  pub-ic  interest  sufficiently  com- 
manding to  enable  them  to  break  in  upon  tlie  principles 
of  language ;  if  they  were,  we  should  soon  have  aj  many  hes 
and  shes  as  the  Fx'ench,  or  any  other  nation  in  the  world. 


34  Slymology 

43.  "While,  however,  I  lay  down  this  rule  as  required 
hy  strict  grammatical  correctness,  I  must  not  omit  to 
observe  that  the  hcense  allowed  to  figurative  langviage 
enables  us  to  give  the  masculine  or  feminine  gender  to 
inanimate  objects.  This  has  justly  been  regarded  as  a 
great  advantage  in  our  language.  V/e  can,  whenever 
our  subject  will  justify  it,  transform  into  mascvdine,  or 
into  feminine,  nouns  which  ai'e,  strictly  speaking,  neuter; 
and  thus,  by  giving  the  fiinctions  of  life  to  inanimate 
objects,  enliven  and  elevate  our  style,  and  give  to  our 
-expressions  great  additional  dignity  and  force. 

This  13  the  figure  called  personification,  which  may  be  illustrated 
by  such  examples  as  these :  ' '  Grim-viaaged  War  hath  smoothed 
Jds  wrinkled  front."  '^^ Peace  hath  her  victories  no  less  renowned 
than  War."  "I  care  not,  Fortune,  what  you  me  deny;  you  can- 
not rob  me  of  free  Nature^ s  grace;  you  cannot  shut  the  win- 
dows of  the  sky,  through  which  Aurora  shows  her  brightening 
face."  Notice  that  a  noun  personified  is  always  spelled  with  a 
capital  letter ;  and  that  the  noun  is  made  masculine  or  feminine 
according  to  its  nature. 

Some  grammarians  speak  of  a  fourth  gender,  the  convmcn 
gender.  Nouns  that  are  common  to  both  genders,  they  call  such ; 
as,  friend,  parent,  cook,  slave.  But  there  is  really  no  necessity  for 
such  a  distinction.  When  I  speak  of  a  friend,  I  ccrtainl}-^  know 
whether  that  friend  is  man  or  woman,  and  it  is  very  easy  to  let  my 
hearer  or  reader  know,  too,  if  necessary.  K  I  do  not  indicate  It 
by  the  pronoun,  my  hearer  or  reader  may  assume  that  the  friend  is 
man  or  woman,  as  he  thinks  fit ;  but  he  cannot  think  of  him  or 
her  as  both  at  once.  Indeed  the  gender  is  usually  indicated  by  the 
context ;  that  is,  by  the  partes  of  the  discourse  preceding  and  suc- 
ceeding the  word  in  question.  I  can  hardly  speak  of  a  person 
without  using  Jie  or  slie.  The  Germans  generally  add  in  to  the 
masculine  noun  to  make  it  feminine,  as,  Freund,  Frenndin  ;  the 
French  generally  add  e  to  the  masculine  form;  ks,  servant, 
servante ;  and  the  only  form  in  English  that  is  regular  is  adding 
«ss  to  the  masculine,  or  changing  its  ending  into  ess;  as,  mayor, 
mayoress;  hunter,  huntress;  actor,  actress;  count,  countess; 
duke,  duchess.  As  this,  however,  can  be  applied  to  but  compar- 
atively few  words  in  our  language,  we  are  obliged  to  make  use 
cf  various  expedients  to  indicate  gender ;  as,  dog-fox,  bitch-fox ; 


Of  JVbuns.  35 

cock-sparrow,  hen-sparrow ;  he-goat,  she-goat ;  male  cook,  female 
cook.  Generally,  however,  in  speaking  of  animals,  and  also  of 
infants,  the  distinction  of  sex  is  not  observed ;  that  is  to  say,  these 
are  usually  spoken  of  in  the  neuter  gender.  "What  a  handsome 
bird  it  is  1  Look  at  that  dog !  What  a  noble  creature  it  is !  Did 
you  see  the  baby?  What  an  interesting  child  it  is!"  When  we 
speak  of  any  bird  or  animal  distinguished  for  its  boldness,  size,  or 
other  quality  peculiar  to  the  male,  we  usually  give  it  the  masculine 
gender,  even  if  its  sex  be  not  known.  Such  are,  for  instance,  the 
horse  or  steed,  the  eagle,  the  condor,  the  mastiff,  the  St.  Bernard 
or  Newfoundland  dog,  and  the  like.  Of  course,  all  animals  are 
personified  in  fables. 

As  the  words  male  and  female  carry  a  rather  animalish  significance 
with  them,  we  sometimes  say  a  lady-friend,  a  gentleman-riikr,  a 
boy-singer.  Somebody  has  observed  that  the  words  over  the 
public-school  entrances,  "Entrance  for  males,"  "Entrance  for 
females,"  sound  as  if  they  were  entrances  for  go  many  little  he- 
bears  and  she-bears,  and  therefore  prefers  "Entrance  for  boys," 
"Entrance  for  girls."  It  is  fur  better  to  speak,  for  instance,  of  a 
country  being  governed  by  a  woman  than  by  a  female. 

44.  THE  CASES.  The  word  case,  as  appHed  to  the 
concerns  of  hfe,  has  a  variety  of  meanings,  or  of  different 
shades  of  meaning ;  but  its  general  meaning  is  state  of 
things,  or  state  of  something.  Thus  we  say,  "In  t?iat 
case,  I  agree  with  you."  Meaning,  "  that  being  the  state 
of  things,  or  that  being  the  state  of  the  matter,  I  agree 
with  you."  Lawyers  are  said  "to  make  out  their  case ; 
■or  not  to  make  out  their  case  f'  meaning  the  state  of  the 
matter  which  they  have  undertaken  to  prove.  So,  when 
we  say  that  a  horse  is  in  good  case,  we  mean  that  he  is  in 
a  good  state.  Nouns  may  be  in  different  states,  or  situa- 
tions, as  to  other  Noxms,  or  other  words.  For  instance, 
a  Noun  may  be  the  name  of  a  person  who  strikes  a  horse, 
or  of  a  person  viho possesses  a  horse,  or  of  a  person  whom 
a  horse  kicks.  And  these  different  situations,  or  states, 
are,  therefore,  called  cases. 

45.  Tou  vdll  not  fully  comprehend  the  use  of  these 
distinctions  till  you  come  to  the  Letter  on  Verbs  ;  but  it 


36  Etymology 

is  necessary  to  explain  here  the  nature  of  these  cases,  in 
order  that  you  may  be  prepai-ed  well  for  the  use  of  the 
terms,  "when  I  come  to  speak  of  the  Verbs.  In  the  Latin 
language  each  No^on  has  several  different  endings,  in 
order  to  denote  the  different  cases  in  which  it  may  be. 
In  our  language  there  is  but  one  of  the  cases  of  Nouns 
"which  is  expressed  or  denoted  by  a  change  in  the  ending 
of  the  Noun ;  and  of  this  change  I  will  speak  presently. 

46.  There  are  thiee  Cases:  the  Nominative,  the /'os- 
sessive,  and  the  Objective.  A  Noun  is  in  the  JSToniinative 
case  when  it  denotes  a  person,  or  thing,  which  does  some- 
thing or  is  something ;  as,  Richard  strikes ;  Richard  is 
good. 

47.  A  Noun  is  in  the  Possessive  case  when  it  names  a 
person  or  thing  that  possesses  some  other  person  or 
thing,  or  when  there  is  one  of  the  persons  or  things  be- 
longing to  the  other;  as,  Richard'' s  hat ;  the  vnountaiyts 
top ;  the  nation's  fleet.  Here  Richard,  mountain,  and 
nation,  are  in  the  vossessive  case,  because  they  denote 
persons  or  things  vfhich.  possess  other  persons  or  things, 
or  have  other  persons  or  things  belonging  to  them. 
And  here  is  that  change  in  the  ending  of  the  Noun,  of 
which  I  spoke  above.  You  see  that  Richard,  mountain, 
nation,  has,  each  of  them,  an  s  added  to  it,  and  a  mark  of 
elision  over ;  that  is  to  say,  a  cotnina,  placed  above  the 
line,  between  the  last  letter  of  the  word  and  the  s.  This 
is  done  for  the  purpose  of  distinguishing  this  case  from 
the  plural  number ;  or,  at  least,  it  answers  the  purpose  in 
all  cases  where  the  plural  of  the  Noun  would  end  in  an 
«/  though  there  are  different  opinions  as  to  the  ox'igin  of 
its  use.  In  Nouns  which  do  not  end  their  plural  in  s,  the 
mark  of  elision  would  not  appear  to  be  absolutely  neces- 
sary. We  might  write  mans  mind,  womans  heart,  bat  it 
is  best  to  use  the  mark  of  elision.  When  plui-al  Nouns 
end  with  s,  you  must  not  add  an  s  to  form  the  possessive 
ease,  but  put  the  elision  mai-k  only  after  the  s  which  ends 


Of  Nouns.  37 

the  Noiin;  as,  mountains'  tops;  nations'  fleets;  lasses' 
chaxms.  Observe,  however,  that,  ia  every  instance,  the 
possessive  case  may  be  expresseJ  by  a  turn  of  the  words; 
as,  the  hat  of  Richard  j  the  top  of  the  mountain  /  the 
fleet  of  the  nation ;  the  mind  of  man;  and  so  on.  The 
Nouns,  notwithstanding  this  turn  of  the  words,  are  still 
in  the  possessive  case;  and,  as  to  when  one  mode  of 
expression  is  best,  and  when  the  other,  it  is  a  matter 
■which  must  be  left  to  taste. 

48.  A  noun  is  in  the  Objective  case  when  the  person  or 
thing  that  it  names  or  denotes  is  the  object  or  end  of 
Bomo  act  or  of  some  movement,  of  some  kind  or  other; 
Richaid  strikes  Peter;  Richard  gave  a  blow  to  Peter; 
Richard  goes  after  Peter  ;  Richard  hates  Peter ;  Richard 
wants  arms ;  Richard  seeks  a/6<3r/ame/  falsehood  leads 
to  m,ischief;  oppression  produces  resistance.  Here  you 
see  that  all  these  Nouns  in  the  objective  case  ax'e  the 
object,  the  end,  or  the  effect,  of  something  done  or  felt  by 
some  person  or  thing,  and  which  other  person  or  thing  is 
in  the  nominative  case. 

That  is  to  say,  a  noun  is  always  the  object  of  one  of  two  things, 
a  transitive  verb  or  a  preposition.  I  doa't  think  there  is  anything 
that  enables  one  to  understand  tliis  matter  of  case  so  well  as  a  proper 
comprehension  of  the  difference  between  the  transitive  and  the  in- 
transitive verb.  I  know  I  never  understood  it  until  I  learned  what 
a  transitive  verb  was. — We  have  seen  that  verbs  are  words  express- 
ing action  or  a  state  of  being.  Now  watch.  "  I  walk  in  the  field ; 
1  run  every  daj' ;  I  dream  very  often ;  I  line  in  Hoboken."  Here  the 
verba  xoalk,  run,  dream,  live,  express  an  action  which  does  not  pass 
from  the  actor  or  subject;  it  is  confined  to  him;  docs  not  pass 
ever  to  any  thing;  it  is  therefore  intransitive.  "I  walk  a  horse; 
I  run  ^grist-mill;  I  dream  bad  dreams;  I  live  the  lie  down."  Hera 
the  action  passes  from  the  actor  to  something  else;  Mgoes  over  to  some- 
thing ;  the  verb  is,  therefore,  transitive.  Now  wherever  this  ia  the 
case,  wherever  the  action  passes  to  some  object,  that  object  or  thing 
or  noun  is  in  the  objective  case.  Again :  "  The  boy  is  choking" — 
"the  boy  is  choking  tlie  cat."  In  the  first  instance,  the  verb  is 
iotransitive ;   in  the  second,  it  is  transitive,  and  "cat"  is  conse- 


4 


38  Mtyrnology 

quently  in  the  objective  case.  Besides  the  transitive  verb,  there 
is,  as  I  have  said,  only  one  other  thing  tliat  can  jmt  a  noun  in  the 
objective  case,  and  that  is  the  preposition,  which  always  governs  tlie 
objective  case,  or  puts  whatever  thing  follows  it  in  the  objective 
case.  You  notice  this  in  the  above  examples  of  Cobbett's  ;  the 
noun  each  time  comes  after  a  transitive  verb  or  a  preposition.  In 
the  examples  I  gave  you  with  tlie  desk  (Letter  III,  par.  29),  that 
word  is  invariably  in  the  objective  case.  As  to  the  nominative 
case  (the  subject),  the  name  of  the  person  or  thing  that  docs,  is,  or 
suffers  something  is  in  that  case.  Notice  tliat  a  noun  following 
the  verb  to  be  is  always  in  the  nominative  case.  Tlie  Germans,  in 
their  expressive  language,  call  these  three  cases  the  who-case,  tlie 
wJiose-case,  and  the  whom-case.  Just  try  this,  and  you  will  see  that 
the  nominative  answers  to  Wlwf  the  possessive  to  Whose?  and  the 
objective  to  Whom? 


LETTER    VI. 

etymology   of   pbonoun8. 

My  dear  James  : 

49.  Tou  will  now  refer  to  paiagraphs  17,  18,  and  19,  in 
Letter  III ;  which  paragraphs  will  refresh  your  memory 
as  to  the  general  nature  and  use  of  Pronouns.  Then,  in 
proceeding  to  become  well  acquainted  with  this  Part  of 
Speech,  you  will  first  observe  that  there  are  four  classes, 
or  descriptions,  of  Pronouns  :  first,  the  Personal;  second, 
the  JRelative ;  third,  the  Demonstrative;  and,  fourth,  the 
Indefinite. 

50.  In  PERSONAL  PRONOUNS  there  are  four 
things  to  be  considered:  the  person,  the  number,  the 
gender,  and  the  case. 

61  There  aie  three  persons.  The  Pronoun  which 
represents,  or  stands  in  the  place  of,  the  name  of  the  per- 
son who  speaks,  is  called  the  fi,rst  person;  that  which 
stands  in  the  place  of  the  name  of  the  person  who  is 
spoken  to,  is  called  the  second  person ;  that  which  stands 


Of  Pronouns.  39 

in  the  place  of  the  name  of  the  person  who  is  spoken  of, 
is  called  the  ^AiVf^^^erso^i.  For  example:  "JT  am  asking 
yoxL  about  him.''''  This  circumstance  of  person  you  will 
by-and  by  find  to  be  of  great  moment ;  because,  as  you 
will  see,  the  verbs  vaiy  their  endings  sometimes  to  corre- 
spond with  the  person  of  the  Pronoun ;  and,  therefore 
you  ought  to  pay  strict  attention  to  it  at  the  outset. 

52.  The  7iuniber  is  either  singular  or  plm-al,  and  the 
Pronouns  vary  their  spelling  to  express  a  difference  of 
nnmber;  as  in  this  table,  which  shows,  at  once,  all  the 
persons  and  all  the  numbers. 


SINGULAR. 

PLURAL 

Fu-st  person 

I, 

We. 

Second  person 

Thou. 

You. 

Third  person 

He, 

They. 

63.  The  next  thing  is  the  gender.  The  Pronouns  of 
the  first  and  second  person  have  no  changes  to  expresa 
gender;  but  the  thud  person  singular  has  changes  for 
that  pui'pose:  he,  she,  or  it ;  and  I  need  not  point  out 
to  you  the  cases  where  one  of  these  ought  to  be  used 
instead  of  the  other. 

54.  The  case  is  the  last  thing  to  be  considered  in  per- 
sonal Pronouns.  The  meaning  of  the  word  case,  as  used 
in  the  rules  of  Grammar,  I  have  fully  explained  to  you  in 
Letter  V,  paragraph  44.  In  pai-agraphs  45,  46,  47,  and 
48,  in  the  same  Letter,  I  have  treated  of  the  distinction 
between  the  cases.  Kead  all  those  paragraj^hs  again 
before  you  proceed  further :  for  now  you  will  find  their 
meining  moi-e  cleai-ly  explained  to  you ;  because  the  per- 
sonal Pronouns,  and  also  some  of  the  other  Pronouns, 
have  different  endings,  or  are  composed  of  different  let- 
ters, in  order  to  point  out  the  different  cases  in  which 
they  aie :  as,  he,  his,  him. 

65.  The  personal  Pronouns  have,  like  the  nouns,  three 
cases :  the  Nominative,  the  Possessive,  and  the  Objective. 


40 


Etymology 


The  following'  table  exhibits  the  whole  of  them  at  one 
view,  with  all  the  cu'cumstanoea  of  person,  number, 
gender,  and  case. 


First  Person 


SINGUIiAR  NUMBEE. 

Nominative.      Possessive. 

r         J  My, 


Second  Person         Thou, 
Masc.  Gen.     He, 


Third 
Pers. 


Femin.  " 
Neuter  " 


She, 
It, 


PLURAL  NUMBER. 


First  Person 


Nominative.      Possessive. 
"  Our, 
Ours, 


We, 


Second  Person  You, 

Masc.  Gen.    They, 


Your, 
Yours, 


Third 
Pers. 


Thei 


-J, 
They, 


Their, 
Theirs, 


Objective. 
Me. 

Thee. 
Him. 
Her. 
It. 

Objective. 
Ua. 

You. 
Them. 


Femin.  " 
^  Neuter  " 

56.  Upon  this  table  there  ai-e  some  remarks  to  ba 
attended  to.  lu  the  possessive  cases  of  I,  T'hou,  She, 
We,  You,  and  They,  there  are  two  different  words :  as, 
My,  or  Mine;  bat  you  know  that  the  former  is  used 
when  followed  bj  the  name  of  the  person  or  thing  pos- 
sessed ;  and  that  the  latter  is  used  when  not  so  followed ; 
as,  "  This  is  Twy /)e?i  /  this  pen  is  mlneP  And  it  is  the 
same  with  regard  to  the  possessive  cases  of  Thou^  She, 
We,  You,  and  They. 


Of  Pronouns.  41 

The  same  grammarians  that  wish  to  call  every  word  that  stands 
before  a  noun  an  adjective,  call  these  words,  my,  thy,  his,  your^ 
their,  possessive  adjectives ;  they  call  them  such  when  coming  di- 
rectly before  a  noun,  and  pronouns  when  standing  alone.  I  know 
no  change  more  utterly  useless  and  confusing.  Do  they  not  always 
stand  ia  the  p'ace  of  nouns  in  the  possessive  case?  *'I  met  Tom 
Jones,  and  gave  him  a  message  from  his  father."  Docs  this  his 
not  stand  for  Tom^s,  a  noun  ia  the  possessive  case  ?  When  Billy 
Clutterbuck  says,  "This  is  my  dog,"  does  it  not  mean,  This  is 
Billy  Clutterbuck's  dog? 

57.  TTioii  is  here  given  a3  tlie  second  person  singular; 
but  common  custom  has  set  aside  the  rules  of  Grammar 
in  this  case;  and  though  we,  in  particular  cases,  still 
make  use  of  Thou  and  Thee,  we  generally  make  use  of 
You  instead  of  either  of  them.  According  to  ancient  rule 
and  custom  this  is  not  coiTCct ;  but  what  a  whole  people 
adopts  and  universally  practises  must,  in  such  cases,  be 
deemed  correct,  and  to  be  a  superseding  of  ancient  rule 
and  custom. 

53.  Instead  of  you  the  ancient  practice  was  to  put  ys 
in  the  nominative  case  of  the  second  person  plui'al ;  but 
this  practice  is  now  laid  aside,  except  in  cases  which  very 
seldom  occur ;  but  whenever  ye  is  made  use  of,  it  must 
be  in  the  nominative,  and  never  in  the  objective,  case.  I 
may,  speaking  to  several  persons,  say,  "  Ye  have  injured 
me,"  but  not  "I  have  injured  ye." 

There  is  nothing  that  more  strikingly  displays  the  spirit  of  caste 
in  Germany  than  the  fact  that  there  are  f<jur  different  ways  in 
German  of  saying  you,  according  to  the  rank  or  social  position  of 
the  person  addressed  (Sie,  du,  ihr.  er).  In  English,  we  say  you 
to  the  President,  and  you  to  a  beggar;  yov.  to  a  king,  and  you  to  an 
assemblage  of  kings ;  and  this  is  characteristic  of  the  sturdy  love  of 
fair  play  among  the  English  race.  In  the  Prussian  army,  the  oflBcer 
addresses  the  common  soldier  in  the  third  person ;  he  shall  do  so 
and  so.  Amonor  German  students,  there  are  only  two  classes  worthy 
of  respect ;  those  that  are  students,  and  those  that  have  been  stu- 
dents ;  all  the  rest  are  cattle. —  Te  is  never  used  now  except  in  the 
solemn  style,  uomiiuitive  plural :  O  ye  boys  of  America,  beware  ot 


42  Etymology. 

the  cheap  story-papers,  and  the  cheap  and  nasty  story-bookB,  for 
they  carry  the  seeds  of  a  disease  that  kill  soul  and  body. 

It  is  a  remarkable  fact  that  many  of  our  obsolete  expressions  are 
retained  for  the  solemn  style.  Thou,  thy,  thee  are  now  used  in 
prayer,  and  in  solemn  compositions,  such  as  Coleridge's  Hymn  to! 
Mont  Blanc,  or  Milton's  Paradise  Lost. 

59.  The  words  self  &nd  selves  are  sometimes  added  tc 
the  personal  Pronouns;  as  nii/self,  thyself^  himself;  but, 
as  these  compounded  words  ai-e  liable  to  no  variation^ 
that  can  possibly  lead  to  error,  it  vrill  be  useless  to  do  any- 
thing further  than  just  to  notice  them. 

60.  The  Pronoun  it,  though  a  personal  Pronoun,  does 
not  always  stand  for,  or  at  least  appear  to  stand  for,  any 
noun  whatever ;  but  is  used  in  order  to  point  out  a  state 
of  things,  or  the  cause  of  something  produced.  For 
instance :  "  It  freezed  hard  last  night,  and  it  was  so  cold, 
that  it  was  with  great  difficulty  the  travellers  kept  on 
their  journey."  Now,  what  was  it  that  freezed  so  hai'd  = 
Not  the  frost ;  because  the  frost  is  the  effect,  and  not  the 
cause  of  freezing.  We  cannot  say  that  it  was  the  toeather 
that  freezed ;  because  the  freezing  constituted  in  pai"t  the 
weather  itself.  No ;  the  Pronoun  it  stands,  in  this  place, 
for  state  of  things,  or  circumstances ;  and  this  sentence 
might  be  written  thus :  "  The  freezing  was  so  hard  last 
night,  and  the  cold  was  so  severe,  that  the  travellers 
fotmd  great  difficulty  in  keeping  on  their  jomney."  Let 
us  take  another  example  or  two :  "  It  is  a  frost  this  morn- 
ing. It  will  rain  to-night.  It  will  be  fine  to-morrow." 
That  is  to  say,  "  A  state  of  things  called  frost  exists  this 
morning ;  a  state  of  things  called  rain  will  exist  to-night ; 
and  to-morrow  a  state  of  things  called  fine  weather." 
Another  example :  "  It  is  delightful  to  see  brothers  and 
sisters  Uving  in  uninterrupted  love  to  the  end  of  theu* 
days."  That  is  to  say,  "  The  state  of  things  which  ex- 
hibits brothers  and  sisters  living  in  unintemipted  love  to 
the  end  of  theii-  days  is  delightful  to  see."     The  Pronoun 


Of  Pronouns.  45 

it  is,  in  this  its  impersonal  capacity,  used  in  a  great 
vaiiety  of  instances ;  but  I  forbear  to  extend  my  remarks 
on  the  subject  here;  because  those  remai'ks  will  find  a 
more  suitable  place  when  I  come  to  another  pai't  of  my 
instructions.  I  have  said  enough  here  to  prevent  the 
puzzling  that  might  have  aiisen  from  your  perceiving  that 
the  Pronoun  it  was  sometimes  used  without  yoiu*  being 
able  to  trace  its  connection  with  any  noun  either  expressed 
or  understood 

61.  In  order,  however,  fui'ther  to  illustrate  this  matter 
in  this  place,  I  will  make  a  remai'k  or  two  upon  the  use 
of  the  word  there.  Example :  "  There  are  many  men,  who 
have  been  at  Latin  schools  for  years,  and  who,  at  last, 
cannot  wi'ite  six  sentences  in  English  coiTectly,"  Now, 
you  know,  the  word  there.,  in  its  usual  sense,  has  reference 
to  place  /  yet  it  has  no  such  reference  here.  The  mean- 
ing is  that  "  Many  men  are  in  existence  who  have  been  at 
Latin  schools."  Again :  "  There  never  teas  any  thing  so 
beautiful  as  that  flower."'  That  is  to  say,  "Any  thing  so 
beautiful  as  that  flower  never  existed,  or  never  loas  in 
being. '^ 

It  may,  perhaps,  be  useful  for  you  to  know  (especially  if  you 
intend  to  pass  an  examination)  that  the  word  there  in  the  sentences 
here  given  is  called  an  expletive,  which  means  a  word  used  merely 
to  fill  up  a  vacancy.  You  can  always  leave  it  out  without  altering 
the  sense.  "There  is  a  tree  in  the  garden "  is  nothing  but  " a  tree 
ifi  in  the  garden."  And  you  will  now,  perhaps,  be  better  able  to 
understand  Pope's  satirical  lines  on  the  works  of  poor  authors : 

"While  expletives  their  feeble  aid  do  join. 
And  ten  slow  words  oft  creep  in  one  dull  line." 

62.  We  now  come  to  the  KELATIYE  PRONOUNS,  of 
which  class  there  ai'e  only  three;  namely.  Who,  Which, 
and  That.  The  two  latter  always  remain  the  same, 
through  all  numbers,  genders,  and  cases ;  but  the  Pro- 
noun who  changes  its  endings  in  order  to  express  the 
possessive  and  objective  cases;  as,  who,  whose,  whom. 


44  Etymology 

63.  These  Pronouns  are  called  relative,  because  they 
always  relate  directly  to  some  noun  or  some  personal 
Pronoun,  or  to  some  combination  of  words,  which  is 
called  the  antecedent ;  that  is  to  say,  the  person  or  thing 
going  before.  Thus :  "  The  soldier  who  was  killed  at  the 
siege."  Soldier  is  the  antecedent.  Again :  "  The  men,  if 
£  am  rightly  informed,  who  came  hither  last  night,  who 
went  away  this  morning,  whose  money  you  have  received, 
and  to  whom  you  gave  a  receipt,  are  natives  of  South 
America."  3fen  is  here  the  ayitecedent ;  and  in  this 
sentence  there  are  all  the  variations  to  which  this  Pro- 
noun is  liable. 

64.  Who,  whose,  and  whom  cannot  be  used  correctly 
as  relatives  to  any  Nouns  or  Pronouns  which  do  not  re- 
present tne^i,  women,  or  children.  It  is  not  con'ect  to 
say,  the  horse,  or  the  dog,  or  the  ti'ee,  who  was  so  and  so ; 
or  to  whom  was  done  this  or  that ;  or  whose  color,  or 
any  thing  else,  was  such  or  such.  But  the  word  That,  as 
a  relative  Pronoun,  may  be  applied  to  nouns  of  all  sorts ; 
as,  the  hoy  that  ran ;  the  horse  that  galloped ;  the  tree 
that  was  blowed  down. 

The  real  reason  for  this  use  of  the  word  that,  however,  is  be- 
cause we  must  sometimes  find  a  pronoun  that  will  stand  for  both 
men  and  animals  together :  "The  horses  and  the  riders  that  we  saw 
are  tlie  favorites."  And  concerning  the  pronoun  who,  a  change 
Las  taken  place  since  Cobbett's  time :  we  can  now  use  it  in  the 
possessive  case  (whose)  with  reference  to  things  as  well  as  per- 
sons. "  The  mountain  whose  top  is  covered  with  snow,"  is  con- 
sidered easier  and  more  elegant  tha,n  "The  mountain  the  top  of 
which  is  covered  with  snow."  The  poets  began  to  use  this  form, 
and  prose-writers  now  use  it  too.  By-the-way,  you  will  notice  that 
Cobbett  is  a  little  peculiar  in  using  some  irregular  verbs  in  the 
regular  form ;  as,  Mowed  and  freezed  for  blown  and  froze.  More  of 
this  farther  on. 

65.  Which,  as  a  relative  Pronoun,  is  confined  to  irra- 
tional creatures,  and  here  it  may  be  used  as  a  relative  in- 
differently with  that ;  as,  the  horse  which  galloped ;  the 


Of  Pronouns.  45 

tree  which  was  blowed  down.  Tliia  application  of  tlio 
relative  which  solely  to  irrational  creatures  is,  however, 
of  modem  date ;  for,  in  the  Lord's  Prayer,  in  the  Enghsh 
Church  Service,  we  say,  "  Our  Father  which  art  in  heaven.** 
In  the  American  Liturgy  this  error  has  been  corrected; 
and  they  say,  "  Our  Father  who  art  in  heaven." 

66.  I  cannot,  even  for  the  present,  quit  these  relative 
Pronouns  without  observing  to  you  that  they  are  words 
of  vast  importance,  and  that  more  errors,  and  errors  of 
greater  consequence,  arise  from  a  misapphcation  of  them 
than  from  the  misapplication  of  almost  all  the  other 
classes  of  words  put  together.  The  reason  is  this,  they 
are  relatives,  and  they  frequently  stand  as  the  repre- 
sentatives of  that  which  has  gone  before,  and  which 
stands  in  a  distant  part  of  the  sentence.  This  will  b© 
more  fully  explained  when  I  come  to  the  S^jntax  of 
Pronouns;  but  the  matter  is  of  such  great  moment 
that  I  could  not  refrain  from  giving  you  an  intimation 
of  it  here. 

67.  The  DEMONSTRATIVE  PRONOUNS  are  so  called 
because  they  more  particularly  mark  or  demonstrate  the 
nouns  before  which  they  are  placed,  or  for  which  they 
sometimes  stand.  They  are,  2'his,  These,  That,  T'hose^ 
and  What.  The  use  of  them  is  so  well  known,  and  is 
hable  to  so  Httle  error,  that  my  chief  object  in  giving 
them  this  separate  place  is  to  show  you  the  difference  be- 
tween That,  when  a  relative,  and  when  not  a  relative. 
Take  an  example :  "  2'hat  man  is  not  the  man,  as  far  as  I 
am  able  to  discover,  that  came  hither  last  night."  The 
first  of  these  Thats  does  not  relate  to  the  man ;  it  merely 
points  Lim  out ;  but  the  latter  relates  to  him,  carries  you 
back  to  him,  and  supplies  the  place  of  repetition.  This 
same  word.  That,  is  sometimes  a  Conjunction;  as,  "  That 
man  is  not  the  man,  as  far  as  I  can  discover,  that  came 
hither  last  night,  and  that  was  so  ill  that  he  could  hardly 
walk."     The  relative  is  repeated  in  the  third  That;  but 


46  Etymology 

the  fourth  That  is  merely  a  conjunction  serving  to  con- 
nect the  effect  of  the  illness  with  the  cause. 

"I  say  that  that  that  that  that  author  uses  is  false."  Try  and 
discover  tlie  four  different  parts  of  speech  represented  by  the  word 
that  in  this  sentence. —  This,  that,  and  tlieir  plural,  th£se,  tliose,  are. 
like  tlie  articles,  called  limiting  adjectives  when  used  directly  be- 
fore nouns,  this  hat,  these  hats.  When  used  with  reference  tc 
things  pointed  at,  tJiese  refers  to  things  nearer  at  hand  than  those. 

68.  Perhaps  a  profound  examination  of  the  matter 
■would  lead  to  a  proof  of  That  being  always  a  Pronoun; 
but,  as  such  examination  would  be  more  curious  than  use- 
fid,  I  shall  content  myself  with  having  clearly  shown  you 
the  difference  in  its  offices,  as  a  relative,  as  a  detnonstra- 
tive,  and  as  a  co7iJunctlon. 

69.  What,  together  with  who,  whose,  whom,  and  which, 
are  employed  in  asking  questions;  and  are  sometimes 
ranged  under  a  separate  head,  and  called  Interrogative 
Pronouns.  I  have  thought  this  unnecessaay ;  but  here  is 
an  observation  of  importance  to  attend  to;  for  which, 
though  as  a  relative  it  cannot  be  applied  to  the  intellectual 
species,  is,  as  an  interrogative,  properly  apjjhed  to  that 
species;  as,  "  Which  man  was  it  who  spoke  to  you?" 

70.  What  sometimes  stands  for  both  noun  and  relative 
Pronoun ;  as,  "  What  I  want  is  well  known."  That  is  to 
say,  "  The  thing  which  I  want  is  well  known."  Indeed, 
what  has,  in  ail  cases,  this  extended  signification;  for 
•when,  in  the  way  of  inquiry  as  to  words  which  we  have 
not  cleai'ly  understood,  we  say,  What  ?  our  full  meaning 
is,  "Repeat  to  us  that  which  you  have  said,"  or,  "the 
words  which  you  have  spoken." 

In  this  sentence,  "I  gave  him  what  (that  which)  he  wanted." 
what  is  a  relative  pronoun ;  but  in  this  sentence,  "I  gave  him  w}iat 
funds  he  wanted,"  it  is  an  adjective.  Notice  that  we  always  say 
that,  never  wJiat,  after  ecery  thing,  any  thing,  nothing,  something, 
all  things. 

71.  The  INDETERMINATE  PRONOUNS  aie  so  called 


Of  Adjectives.  47 

because  they  express  their  objects  in  a  general  and  inde- 
termiBate  manner.  Several  of  them  ai"e  also  adjectives. 
It  is  only  where  they  ai'e  employed  alone,  that  is  to  say, 
without  nouns,  that  they  ought  to  be  regarded  as  Pro- 
noiins.  For  instance :  "  One  is  always  heai'ing  of  the  un- 
happiness  of  one  person  or  another. ^^  The  first  of  these 
ones  is  a  Pronoim ;  the  last  is  an  Adjective,  as  is  also  the 
word  another/  for  a  noun  is  understood  to  follow,  though 
it  is  not  expressed.  These  pronouns  are  as  follows :  One, 
any.,  each,  none.,  some,  other,  every,  either,  many,  whoever.^ 
whatever,  neither,  and  some  few  others,  but  all  of  them 
words  invariable  in  their  orthography,  and  all  of  very 
common  use. 


LETTER    VII. 
etymology  of  adjectives. 
My  dear  James: 

72.  In  Letter  lU,  paragraph  21,  I  have  described  what 
an  Adjective  is.  You  will,  therefore,  now  read  that  para- 
graph carefully  over,  before  we  proceed  in  studying  the 
contents  of  the  present  Letter. 

73.  The  Adjectives  have  no  changes  to  express  gender 
or  case ;  but  they  have  changes  to  express  degrees  of  com- 
parison. As  Adjectives  describe  the  qualities  and  proper- 
ties of  nouns,  and  as  these  may  be  possessed  in  a  degree 
higher  in  one  case  than  in  another  case,  such  words  have 
degrees  of  comparison;  that  is  to  say,  changes  in  their 
endings,  to  sviit  these  varying  cu'cvunstances.  A  tree  may 
be  high,  but  another  may  be  higher,  and  a  thii"d  may  be 
the  highest.  Adjectives  have,  then,  these  three  degrees: 
the  first  degree,  or  rather,  the  primitive  word,  called 
the  Positive;  the  second,  the  Comparative;  the  third, 
the  Superlative.    For  the  forming  of  these  degrees  I  shall 


48  Etymology 

give  you  four  rules ;  aad  if  you  pay  strict  attention  to 
these  rules,  you  mil  need  to  be  told  very  little  more  about 
this  Part  of  Speech. 

74.  First  Rule.  Adjectives  in  general,  which  end  in  a 
consonant,  form  their  comparative  degree  by  adding  er  to 
tiie  positive,  and  form  their  superlative  degree  by  adding 
est  to  the  positive ;  as, 

POSITIVE.  COMPARATIVE.  6UPERLATIVB. 

Bich,  Bicher,  Bichest. 

75.  Second  Mule.  Adjectives,  which  end  in  e,  add,  in 
forming  their  comparative,  only  an  r,  and  in  forming  their 
superlative,  st/  as, 

POSITIVE.  OOMPABATIVE.  SUPERLATIVE. 

Wise,  "Wiser,  "Wisest. 

76.  Third  Rule.  "When  the  positive  ends  in  <?,  </,  or  ty 
and  when  these  consonants  are,  at  the  same  time,  preceded 
"bj  a  single  vowel,  the  consonant  is  doubled  in  forming 
the  comparative  and  superlative ;  as, 


POSITIVE. 

Bed, 

COMPARATIVE. 

Bedder, 

SUPERLATIVE. 

Beddest. 

Big, 
Hot, 

Bigger, 
Hotter, 

Biggest. 
Hottest. 

But,  if  the  d,  g,  or  t,  be  preceded  by  another  consonant, 
or  by  more  than  one  vowel,  the  final  consonant  is  not 
doubled  in  the  forming  of  the  two  latter  degrees ;  as, 


POSITIVE. 

COMPARATIVE. 

SUPERLATIVE. 

Kind, 

Kinder, 

Kindest. 

Neat, 

Neater, 

Neatest. 

77.  Fourth  Rule.  "When  the  positive  ends  in  y,  pre- 
ceded by  a  consonant,  the  y  changes  into  ie  in  the  other 
degrees. 

POSITIVE.  OOMPABATIVE.  SUPERLATIVE. 

Lovely,  Love'aer,  Loveliest. 

Pretty,  Prettier,  Prettiest. 


Of  Adjectives.  49 

78.  There  are  some  Aijectives  which  can  be  reduced  to 
no  rule,  and  whish  must  be  considered  as  irregular ;  as, 


POSITIVE. 

OOMPARATIVJC 

BUPEBLATIVB. 

Good, 

Bjtter, 

Bast. 

Bad, 

Worse, 

Worst 

little. 

Less, 

Least. 

Much, 

More, 

Most. 

79.  Some  Adjectives  can  have  no  degrees  of  comparison, 
because  their  signification  admits  of  no  augmentation ;  as, 
all^  each^  every,  any,  several,  some;  and  all  the  numerical 
Adjectives;  as,  one,  two,  three;  first,  secoiid,  third. 

But  there  are  some  other  adjectives  that  do  not  admit  of  com- 
parison. Consider,  for  a  moment,  such  words  as  tru^,  round, 
tquare,  perfect^  deai.  Properly  speaking,  nothing  can  be  truer 
rounder,  squarer,  more  perfect,  or  deader  than  another;  yet,  in 
popular  speech,  these  words  are  often  used  in  the  comparative  or 
superlative  degree.  How  often  we  hear  people  say,  "  I  never  saw 
any  thing  more  perfect;"  "this  figure  is  not  quite  so  round  as 
that;"  and  the  like.  I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  such  expressions 
tre  absolutely  unpermissible ;  only  that  they  are  not  strictly  cor- 
rect. To  say  "more  nearly  round"  or  "more  nearly  perfect'* 
would  be  more  nearly  correct.  These  expressions,  however,  occur 
in  the  rapid  how  of  conversation,  and  perhaps  express  the  idea 
intended  better  than  a  more  correct  (notice  these  very  words)  or 
more  choice  expression.  Editors  sometimes  speak  of  a  political 
question  as  ' '  the  deadest  of  all  dead  issues ;"  which  is  very  forcible 
language;  and  there  is  a  comparison  implied  in  the  familiar  ex- 
pressions, "dead  as  a  door-nail;  dead  as  Julius  Caesar."—  I  may 
here  mention  that  the  word  old,  in  its  regular  form,  old,  older,  oldest, 
is  used  with  reference  to  persons  and  things  in  general ;  while  tke 
form,  elder,  eldest,  is  used  to  distinguish  kinsfolk  or  historical 
personages :  my  elder  brother  er  nephew,  my  eldest  sister  or 
cousin;   the  elder  Pliny,  the  elder  Brutus,  the  elder  or  youngei 

Put. 

Far,  farther,  farthest  are  used  exclusively  with  reference  to  di». 
tance;  but  we  sometimes  use  the  form  further,  to  indicate  soiiiC' 
thing  more,  or  to  point  out  that  we  have  something  irwre  to  say  on 
a  subject.  The  latter  form  is  also  sometimes  used  as  an  ailjective; 
liave  you  &uy  furtJier  objection? 
3 


50  Etymology 

80.  Adjectives  which  end  in  tnost  are  superlative,  and 
admit  of  no  change ;  as,  utmost,  uppermost,  innermost. 

81.  However,  you  will  observe  that  all  Adjectives  which 
admit  of  comparison  may  form  their  degi'ees  by  the  use 
of  the  words  more  and  most;  as. 


P08ITIVE. 

OOMPARA.TIVE. 

SUPERLATIVE. 

Kich, 

More  rich, 

Most  rich. 

Tender, 

More  tender, 

Most  tender. 

Wlien  the  positive  contains  but  one  syllable,  the  degrees 
ai'e  usually  formed  by  adding  to  the  positive  according  to 
the  four  rules.  When  the  positive  contains  two  syllables, 
it  is  a  matter  of  taste  which  method  you  shall  use  in 
forming  the  degrees.  The  ear  is,  in  this  case,  the  best 
guide.  But  when  the  positive  contains  more  than  two 
syllables,  the  degrees  must  be  formed  by  the  use  of  m,ore 
and  most.  We  may  say  tender  and  tenderest,  pleasanter 
sjx^  pleasantest,  prettier  &nd  prettiest/  but  who  could  tol- 
erate delicater  and  delicatest  ? 

Nobody  but  Thomas  Carlyle,  who  uses  beautifulest,  wonderfuleat, 
and  the  like.  To  use  another  of  Carlyle's  Germanisms,  there  is  no 
question  but  this  usage  is  unright. 


LETTER    VIII. 

etymology   of   vebbs. 

My  dear  James: 

82.  The  fii'st  thing  you  have  to  do  in  beginning  your 
study,  as  to  this  important  Part  of  Speech,  is  to  read 
again  very  slowly  and  carefully  paragraphs  23,  24,  25, 
and  26,  in  Letter  III.  Having,  by  well  attending  to  what 
is  said  in  those  pai'agraphs,  learned  to  dijtinguish  Verbs 
from  the  words  belonging  to  other  Parts  of  Speech,  you 
•will  now  enter,  with  a  clear  head,  on  an  inquiry  into  the 


Of  Verbs.  51 

variations  to  "which  the  words  of  this  Part  of  Speech  are 
liable. 

83.  Sorts  op  Verbs.  Verbs  are  considered  as  active, 
passive,  or  neuter.  A  Verb  is  called  active  when  it  ex- 
presses an  action  which  is  produced  by  the  nominative  of 
the  sentence ;  as,  "  Pitt  restrained  the  Bank."  It  is  pas- 
sive when  it  expresses  an  action  which  is  received,  or 
endured,  by  the  person  or  thing  which  is  the  nominative 
of  the  sentence;  as,  "the  Bank  is  restrained.^''  It  is 
neuter  when  it  expresses  simply  the  state  of  being,  or  of 
existence,  of  a  person  or  thing ;  as,  "  Dick  lies  in  bed ;" 
or,  when  it  expresses  an  action  confined  within  the  actor. 

84.  It  is  of  great  consequence  that  you  clearly  under- 
stand these  distinctions,  becriuee  I  shall,  by-and-by,  use 
these  terms  very  frequently.  And  in  order  to  give  you  a 
proof  of  the  necessity  of  attending  to  these  distinctions, 
I  will  here  give  you  a  specimen  of  «he  errors  which  ai^e 
sometimes  committed  by  those  who  do  not  understand 
Grammar.  This  last-mentioned  Verb,  to  lie,  becomes,  in 
the  past  time,  lay.  Thus :  "  Dick  lies  on  a  bed  now,  but 
Bome  time  ago,  he  lay  on  the  floor."  This  verb  is  often 
confounded  with  the  Verb  to  lay,  which  is  au  active  Verb, 
and  which  becomes,  in  its  past  time,  laid.  Thus :  "  I  lay 
my  hat  on  the  table  to-day,  but,  yesterday,  I  laid  it  on 
the  shelf."  Let  us  take  another  instance,  in  order  the 
more  clearly  to  explain  this  matter.  A  Verb  may  some- 
times be  what  we  call  a  neuter  Verb,  though  it  expresses 
an  action  ;  but  this  happens  when  the  action  is  confined 
within  the  actor  ;  that  is  to  say,  when  there  is  no  object 
to  ichich  the  action  passes.  Strike  is  clearly  an  active 
Verb,  because  somethuig  is  stricken;  a  stroke  is  given  to, 
or  put  upon,  something.  But  in  the  case  of  to  rise, 
though  there  is  an  action,  it  passes  on  to  no  object ;  as,  I 
rise  early.  Here  is  no  object  to  which  the  action  passes. 
But  to  raise  is  an  active  Verb,  because  the  action  passes  on 
to  an  object ;  as,  I  raise  a  stick,  I  raise  my  hand,  I  raise 


62  Etymology 

my  head,  and  also  I  raise  myself;  because,  though  in  thig 
last  instance  the  action  is  confined  to  me,  it  is  understood 
that  my  mind  gives  the  motion  to  my  body.  These 
two  Verbs  are,  in  speaking  and  writing,  incessantly  con- 
founded ;  though  one  is  a  neuter  and  the  other  an  active 
Verb,  though  one  is  regular  and  the  other  irregulai',  or 
though  they  are  not,  in  any  person,  time,  or  mode,  com- 
posed of  the  same  letters.  This  confusion  could  never 
take  place  if  attention  were  paid  to  the  principle  above 
laid  down. 

This  is  one  of  the  hard  passages  in  the  gospel  of  grammar;  a 
passage  which,  I  am  sure,  has  been  a  stumbling-block  to  many  a 
poor  fellow  who  has  been  unable  to  make  head  or  tail  of  it.  Well 
do  I  remember  the  difficulty  I  had  myself,  when  I  first  studied 
this  grammar,  in  making  it  out.  It  is,  I  now  see,  no  wonder  that 
the  matter  was  very  cloudy  to  me ;  for  even  Cobbett,  the  plainest 
and  clearest  of  writers,  has  got  into  a  muddle  about  it,  as  I  shall 
presently  show. 

Look  again  at  my  explanation  of  the  difference  between  the 
transitive  and  the  intransitive  verb  (note  to  paragraph  11).  Then 
remember  that  Cobbett's  ^^ nominative''''  is  another  word  for  subject, 
and  his  '^verb"  another  word  for  predicate.  " Boys  study  gram- 
mar." These  three  words  form  subject,  predicate,  and  object.  ' '  Man 
dies."  Here  is  nothing  but  subject  and  predicate;  and  you  will 
notice  that  "study"  has  an  object,  while  "dies"  has  not. 

I  rise  at  six  o'clock.  I  raise  a  wall ;  I  raise  the  price ;  I  raise  my 
voice.  You  will  readily  see  that  the  verb  to  rise  is  intransitive, 
because  it  has  no  object;  its  action  does  not  pass  to  anything;  and 
that  to  raise  is  transitive,  because  it  has  an  object ;  its  action  passes 
to  something,  even  if  it  is  my  own  voice,  head  or  hand.  Now  both 
these  verbs,  as  used  by  Cobbett,  are  in  the  active  voice,  for  the  pass- 
ing or  not  passing  of  the  action  has  nothing  whatever  to  do  with 
the  verb  being  in  the  active  or  passive  voice,  but  only  with  its 
being  transitive  or  intransitive.  It  is  the  state  of  the  stjbject  (or 
nominative)  alone  that  determines  whether  a  verb  is  active  or  pas- 
sive. "I  rise  early.  I  raise  my  hand."  Both  these  verbs  are  in  the 
active  voice ;  for  the  subject  or  nominative  (I)  is  acting,  and  not 
acted  upon.  The  verb  is  in  the  passive  voice  where  the  strsjECT  or 
NOMINATIVE  is  ACTEr  ON;  as,  I  AM  raiscd ;  but  it  is  m  the  active 
voice  when  the  stbjeo.    or  nominative  is  acting ;  as,  I  rise  at  five 


Of  Verbs.  53 

o'clock.  Notice  that  the  verb  in  the  passive  voice  always  consists 
of  some  part  of  the  verb  to  be  and  the  past  participle  of  another 
▼erb.  Cobbett  is  altogether  wrong  in  saying  that  "^  raise  is  an 
active  verb  because  it  passes  on  to  an  object ; "  it  would  be  active 
whether  the  action  passed  on  to  an  object  or  not;  for,  as  I  ha.\e 
said,  it  is  the  state  of  the  subject  that  determines  its  activeness  or 
passiveness,  and  not  the  verb  itself.  The  passing  of  the  actiou 
simply  shows  that  it  is  trandtive. 

Now  observe  that  this  matter  of  transitive  and  intransitive  verl  is 
is  something  by  itself,  and  that  active  and  passive  voice  is  also 
something  by  itself.  It  will,  perhaps,  help  you  to  understand  the 
matter,  when  I  tell  you  that  no  intransitive  vei-h  can  be  used  in  the 
passive  voice.  You  can  not  say,  I  am  slept,  I  am  dreamt,  I  am 
lived.  No ;  only  transitive  verbs  can  be  used  in  the  passive  voice : 
I  am  hated,  I  am  robbed,  I  am  punished.  These  forms  come  from 
the  verbs  to  hate,  to  rob,  to  punish,  all  of  which  take  an  object,  and 
are  therefore  transitive ;  but  the  forms  to  sleep,  to  dream,  to  live,  do 
not  take  an  object  and  are  therefore  intransitive,  and  cannot  be 
used  in  the  passive  voice. 

Now,  as  to  that  other  bugbear,  the  neuter  verb,  I  think  we  shall 
not  have  much  difficulty  in  understanding  it.  I  never  learned  the 
meaning  of  it  from  Cobbett,  I  must  confess.  And  here  I  may 
inform  you  that  many  grammarians  discard  the  term  neuter  alto- 
gether, and  set  neuter  verbs  down  simply  as  intransitive  verbsr 
which,  indeed,  they  are.  But  you  must  understand  what  is  meant 
by  a  neuter  verb,  any  way.  You  have  seen  that  when  a  verb  is 
used  in  the  active  voice,  the  subject  or  nominative  of  that  verb 
is  ACTING,  and  that  when  one  is  used  in  the  passive  voice,^ 
the  subject  or  nominative  of  that  verb  is  acted  on.  Now, 
where  a  neuter  verb  is  used,  the  subject  is  neither  acting  nor 
acted  on;  it  is  neither,  neuter.  Take  an  example  of  all  three 
cases:  Tommy  kicks  the  pony;  Tommy  is  kicked  by  the  pony; 
Tommy  is  ill.  Now  in  the  first  case,  kicks  is  active,  because  the 
subject  (Tommy)  is  acting ;  in  the  second  case,  is  kicked  is  passive, 
because  the  subject  is  acted  on;  and  in  the  third  case,  it  is  neuter, 
because  the  subject  is  neither  acting  nor  acted  on :  it  is  existence 
WITHOUT  ACTION.  Just  try  if  this  is  not  the  case  with  such  verbs 
as  to  sit,  to  stand,  to  exist,  to  live,  to  lie,  to  sleep.  When  you  are 
Bitting,  standing,  existing,  living,  etc.,  you  are  neither  acting  nor 
acted  on;  you  are  neither,  neuter.  Of  course,  these  verbs  are 
intransitive,  too;  for  all  neuter  verbs  are  intransitive,  but  ali 
intransitive  verbs  are  not  neuter.    There's  the  rub ;  there  is  where 


54  Etymology 

Cobbett  makes  his  mistake:  he  calls  the  verb  to  rise  neuter, 
while  it  is  nothing  of  the  sort;  it  is  simply  intransitive,  and 
active.  The  most  recent  classification  of  verbs  is  into  active- 
transitive,  active-intransitive,  and  neuter.  He  kicks  the  pony; 
he  rises;  he  lives.  (Jobbett,  no  doubt,  followed  the  grammarians 
and  dictionary-makers  of  his  time. 

85.  Having  thus  given  you  the  means  of  distinguishing 
the  sorts  of  Verbs,  I  now  proceed  to  matters  which  are 
common  to  all  the  sorts.  There  are  four  things  to  be 
considered  in  a  verb;  the  person,  the  number,  the  time, 
and  the  mode. 

86.  The  Person. — Read  again  Letter  VI,  on  the  Etymol- 
ogy of  Pronoiins.  You  will  there  clearly  see  the  use  of 
this  distinction  about  J^erso}is  ;  and,  as  I  have  told  yon 
you  will  find  that  it  is  a  matter  of  great  consequence ;  be- 
cause it  will  now,  at  once,  be  evident  to  you  that,  unless 
the  distinction  of  person  be  attended  to,  almost  every 
sentence  must  be  erroneous. 

87.  The  Verb  must  agree  in  person  with  the  Noun  or 
the  Pronoun  which  is  the  nominative  of  the  sentence. 
Look  back  at  Letter  V,  and  at  pai'agi'aphs  44,  45,  46,  and 
47,  in  order  to  refresh  your  memory  as  to  the  nominative 
and  other  cases.  The  Verb,  then,  must  agree  with  the 
nominative ;  as,  "I  %orite;  he  writes.''''  To  say,  "I  writes ; 
he  write  ;  "  these  would  be  both  erroneous. 

88.  Look  back  at  the  explanation  about  the  persons  in 
the  Etymology  of  Pronouns  in  Letter  VI.  There  are 
three  persons  y  but  our  Verbs  have  no  variation  in  their 
spelling,  except  for  the  third  person  singular.  For  we 
say,  "I  write,  you  write,  we  xorite,  they  write  ;''''  and  only 
"  he,  she,  or  it  writes.''"'     This,  then,  ia  a  very  plain  matter. 

89.  Number  is  a  matter  equally  plain,  seeing  that  our 
Verbs  do  not,  except  in  one  or  two  instances,  vary  their 
endings,  to  express  number.  But  when  several  nouns  or 
pronouns  come  together,  care  must  be  taken  to  make  the 
Verb  agree  with  them ;  as,  "  Knight  and  Johnstone  resist 


Of  Verbs.  55 

the  tyrants."  Not  resists.  But  this  will  be  more  fully 
dwelt  on  in  the  Syntax. 

90.  The  Time. — The  Verb  has  variations  to  express  the 
time  of  an  action ;  as,  "  Sidmouth  lorites  a  Circular  Letter ; 
Sidmouth  wrote  a  Circular  Letter ;  Sidmouth  will  lorite  a 
Circular  Letter."  Again:  "The  Queen  defies  the  tyrants; 
the  Queen  defied  the  tyi'ants ;  the  Queen  will  defy  the 
tyrants."  The  Times  of  a  Verb  are,  therefore,  called  the 
present.,  the  past.,  and  the  future. 

91.  The  Modes. — The  Modes  of  Verbs  are  the  different 
manners  of  expressing  an  action  or  a  state  of  being,  which 
manners  are  sometimes  positive,  sometimes  conditional, 
and  sometimes  indeterminate  /  and  there  are  changes  or 
variations,  va.  the  spelling,  or  writiug,  of  the  Verb,  or  of 
the  Uttle  words  used  ^vith  the  Verb,  in  order  to  express 
this  difference  in  manner  and  sense.  I  will  give  you  an 
instance :  "  He  walks  fast."  "  If  he  walk  fast,  he  will 
fatigue  himself."  In  most  other  languages  the  Verb 
changes  its  form  very  often  and  very  much  to  make  it 
express  the  different  modes.  In  ours  it  does  not ;  because 
we  have  httle  words  called  signs,  which  we  use  with  tha 
Verbs  instead  of  vai-ying  the  form  of  the  Verbs  them- 
selves. To  make  this  matter  clear,  I  will  give  you  an 
example  of  the  English  compared  with  the  French 
language  in  this  respect. 

E.  F. 

I  mai'ch,  «/e  m,arche. 

I  mai'ched,  Je  m,archais. 

I  miffht  march,  Je  m,archasse. 

I  should  march,  Je  marcherais. 

There  ai'e  other  variations  in  the  French  Verb ;  but  we 
effect  the  piu-poses  of  these  variations  by  the  use  of  the 
signs,  shall,  may,  might,  could,  would,  and  others. 

92.  The  Modes  are  foui"  in  number ;  the  Infinitive,  the 
Indicative,  the  Subjunctive,  and  the  Imperative.     Besides 


56  Etymology 

these,  there  are  the  two  Participles,  of  which  I  shall  speaik 
presently. 

93.  The  Infinitive  Mode  is  the  Verb  hi  its  primitive 
state ;  as,  to  march.  And  this  is  called  the  Infinitive  be- 
cause it  is  without  bounds  or  limit.  It  merely  expresses 
the  action  of  marching,  without  any  constraint  as  to  per- 
son or  number  or  time.  The  little  word  to  makes,  in  fact, 
a  part  of  the  Verb.  This  word  to  is,  of  itself,  a  preposi- 
tion;  but,  as  prefixed  to  Verbs,  it  is  merely  a  sign  of  the 
Infinitive  Mode.  In  other  languages  there  is  no  such 
sign.  In  the  French,  for  instance,  aller  means  to  go/ 
ecrire  means  to  write.  Thus,  then,  you  will  bear  in  mind 
that  in  English,  the  to  makes  a  pai't  of  the  Verb  itself, 
when  in  the  Infinitive  Mode. 

94.  The  Iiidicative  Mode  is  that  in  which  we  express 
an  action,  or  state  of  being,  positively;  that  is  to  say, 
without  any  cojidition,  or  any  dependent  circumstance. 
It  merely  indicates  the  action  or  state  of  being,  without 
being  subjoined  to  anything  which  renders  the  action  or 
state  of  being  dependent  on  any  other  action  or  state  of 
being.     Thus  :  '■'■lie  writes.''^     This  is  the  Indicative. 

95.  But  the  Subjunctive  Mode  comes  into  use  when  I 
say,  "  If  he  write,  the  guilty  tyi'ants  will  be  ready  with 
their  dungeons  and  axes."  In  this  case  there  is  some- 
thing subjoined  ;  and  therefore  this  is  called  the  Sub- 
junctive Mode.  Observe,  however,  that  in  oui-  language 
there  is  no  very  gi'eat  use  in  this  distinction  of  modes ; 
because,  for  the  most  pai't,  om*  little  signs  do  the  busi- 
ness, and  they  never  vaiy  in  the  letters  of  which  they  are 
composed.  The  distinction  is  usefvd  only  as  regards  the 
employment  of  Verbs  without  the  signs,  and  where  the 
signs  are  left  to  be  understood;  as  in  the  above  case,  "If 
he  (should)  write,  the  guilty  tyi-ants  wiU  be  ready."  And 
observe,  further,  that  when  the  signs  are  used,  or  under- 
stood, the  Verb  retains  its  original  or  pi'imitive  form 
throughout  all  the  persons,  numbers,  and  times. 


Of  Verbs.'  67 

96.  The  Imperative  Mode  is  meutioued  here  merely  for 
form's  sake.  It  is  that  state  of  the  Verb  which  com- 
mands, orders,  bids,  calls  to,  or  invokes ;  as,  come  hither; 
he  good ;  march  away ;  pay  me.  In  other  languages  there 
ai'e  changes  in  the  spelling  of  the  Verbs  to  answer  to  this 
mode ;  but  in  ours  there  are  none  of  these :  and  therefore 
the  matter  is  hardly  worth  notice,  except  as  a  mere  mat- 
ter of  form. 

97.  The  Participles,  however,  are  different  in  point  of 
importance.  They  are  of  two  sorts,  the  active  and  the 
passive.  The  former  ends  always  in.  ing,  and  the  latter 
is  generally  the  same  as  the  past  time  of  the  Verb  out  of 
which  it  grows.  Thus :  working  is  an  active  participle, 
and  worked  a  passive  participle.  They  are  called  parti- 
ciples because  they  partake  of  the  qualities  of  other  Paiis 
of  Speech  as  well  as  of  Verbs.  For  mstance:  "I  am 
working  y  xoorking  is  laudable ;  a  xoorking  man  is  more 
worthy  of  honor  than  a  titled  plunderer  who  Uves  in  idle- 
ness." In  the  first  instance,  xoorking  is  a  Verb,  in  the 
second  a  JSfoun,  in  the  thnd  an  Adjective.  So  in  the  case 
of  the  passive  participle:  I  worked  yesterday;  that  is 
worked  mortar.    The  first  is  a  Verb,  the  last  an  Adjective. 

After  the  indicative,  grammarians  now  insert  another  mood, 
called  the,  potential  mood,  which  indicates  power,  permission,  pos- 
sibility, necessity,  determination,  duty.  This  mood  Cobbett  runs 
into  the  subjunctive,  after  the  manner  of  the  French.  It  is  that 
form  which  necessitates  one  of  "those  powerful  little  words,"  as 
he  calls  them,  may,  might,  can,  must,  loill,  shall,  should,  would. 
This  matter  of  mood,  which  is  quite  a  difficult  subject  for  begin- 
ners, became  much  clearer  to  me  when  I  saw  how  the  Germans 
termed  their  moods  in  their  expressive  language.  They  call  the 
infinitive  mood  the.  ground-farm ;  the  indicative  ih.^  reality-form ; 
the  potential  i\iQ  possibility  form  ;  the  subjunctive,  the  doubt-form  ; 
and  the  imperative  the  comtnanding-fonn.  Like  the  who-case,  the 
whose-case,  and  the  lohom-case,  these  words  are  far  more  expressive 
than  the  Latin  terms  we  use,  wliich  ought  to  have  been  left  where 
they  belonged,  in  Latin. 

You  will  perhaps  be  surprised  to  see  will  and  s?mII,  would  and 
3* 


68  Etymology 

sTiould,  set  down  as  belonging  to  the  potential  mood.  You  will 
Bay  they  belong  to  the  future  and  the  conditional.  So  they  do ; 
but  they  belong  to  the  potential,  too,  as  I  shall  show  you  by-and- 
by.  Take  these  two  examples  of  the  difference  between  the  future 
and  the  potential :  "I  shall  write  (future)  to  you,  if  I  can.  I  will 
vyrite  (potential)  to  you,  come  what  may.  You  will  do  (future) 
that  to-morrow.  You  sAaM  do  (potential)  as  I  tell  you."  This  is 
one  of  the  most  difficult  matters  in  English  grammar ;  a  matter 
which,  Cobbett  says,  foreigners  never  learn  rightly,  but  which  na- 
tives learn  to  use  rightly  from  infancy,  and  do  so  without  ever 
thinking  of  the  matter.  Extensive  reading  of  good  authors  and 
extensive  intercourse  with  good  speakers  are  among  the  best 
means  of  learning  the  correct  use  of  these  words.  I  have  read  of 
a  FrenchTnan  who,  on  falling  into  the  river,  exclaimed:  "I  will 
drown,  and  nobody  shall  help  me !"  More  of  this  anon.  (Note  to 
paragraph  258.) 

98.  Thus  have  I  gone  through  all  the  cii'cumstances  of 
change  to  which  Verbs  are  liable.  I  will  now  give  you 
the  complete  conjugation  of  a  Verb,  To  conjugate,  in  its 
usual  acceptation,  means  to  join  together ;  and,  as  used 
by  grammarians,  it  means  to  place  under  one  view  all  the 
variations  in  the  form  of  a  Verb;  beginning  with  the 
Infinitive  Mode  and  ending  Avith  the  Paiiiciple.  I  will 
now  lay  before  you,  then,  the  conjugation  of  the  Verb  to 
work,  exhibiting  that  Verb  in  all  its  persons,  numbers, 
tunes,  and  modes. 

INFINITIVE  MODE. 

To    WOKK. 

INDICATIVE  MODE. 
Singular.  Plural. 


( 1st  Person.  I  work.  We  work. 

■<  2d 


Present  J  ^^  person.    Thou  workest.  You  work, 
lime,    ^gj  Person.  He,  she,  or  it  works.  They  work. 

Past     C  —  ^  worked,  "We  worked. 

Time     i  —  Thou  workedst.  You  worked. 

(^ —  He  worked.  They  worked. 

Future  C  —  ^  shall  or  will  work.  We  shall  or  will  work. 

Time,  -<  — Thou  shalt  or  wilt  work,  You  shall  or  will  work* 

(_ —  He  shall  or  will  w^rk,  They  shall  or  will  work» 


Of  Verbs.  59 


SUBJUNCTIVE 

MODE. 

If  I  work,  or  may,  might,  could. 

would,  or 

should  work 

If  thou  work,  or  may             " 

"      work 

K  he,  she,  or  it  work,  or  may  " 

"       work 

If  we  work,  or  may                 ' ' 

"       worlc 

If  you  work,  or  may               " 

"      work 

If  they  work,  or  may             " 

' '      work 

DIPERATIVE  MODE. 
Let  me  work,  Let  us  work. 

"Work  thou,  Work  you. 

Let  him  work.  Let  them  work. 

PARTICIPLES. 

A  ctire. — Working. 
Pasidve.  — Worked . 

99.  Some  explanatory  remarks  are  necessary  here.  The 
third  person  singular  of  the  Indicative  present  used  to  be 
written  with  eth  ;  as,  icorketh  ;  but  this  spelling  has  long 
been  disused.  Hhepast  time  may  be  formed  by  did;  as, 
did  work,  instead  of  xcorked  ;  and  do  work  may  be  used 
in  the  present  time ;  but,  in  fact,  these  little  words  are  a 
great  deal  more  than  mere  mai'ks  of  the  times.  They  are 
used  in  one  time  to  express  the  negative  of  another,  or  to 
affirm  with  more  than  ordinaiy  emphasis. 

100.  Grammarians  generally  make  a  present  and  a  past 
time  under  the  Subjunctive  Mode ;  but  the  truth  is  that 
any  of  the  signs  may  apply  to  the  present,  past,  or  futm-e 
of  that  mode.  These  are  httle  words  of  vast  import  and 
of  constant  use ;  and  though  that  use  is  so  very  difficult 
to  be  learned  by  foreigners,  we  oiu'selves  never  make  mis- 
takes with  regard  to  it.  The  Verb  to  be  alone  changes 
its  form  in  order  to  make  a  past  time  in  the  Subjunctive 
Mode. 

101.  As  to  the  Imperative  Mode,  where  the  pronouns 
thou  and  you  are  put  after  the  Verb,  we  seldom  put  the 
thou  and  the  yoic.  We  make  use  of  the  Verb  only,  which 
is  quite  sufficient. 


60  Etymology 

102.  Some  gi'ammai'ians  put  in  their  conjugations  what 
they  call  the  compound  times  ;  as,  I  have  worked^  I  had 
worked,  I  shall  have  worked,  I  may  have  worked,  and  so 
on.  But  this  can  only  serve  to  fill  up  a  book;  for  all 
these  consist  merely  in  the  introduction  and  use  of  the 
Verb  to  have  in  its  various  parts.  In  the  above  conjuga- 
tion all  the  changes  or  varlatio?is  of  the  Yerb  are  exhib- 
ited ;  and  it  is  those  changes  and  valuations  which,  under 
the  present  head,  form  the  important  object  of  our 
inquiiy. 

Well,  at  the  risk  of  incurring  the  reproach  of  merely  "filling  up 
a  book,"  or,  as  the  reviewers  call  it,  "padding  a  book,"  I  shall 
give  you  this  one  verb  entire,  in  its  present  form,  with  its  present 
names  for  moods  and  tenses.  Do  not  be  afraid ;  it  will  not  confuse 
you,  if  you  will  only  be  patient.  There  are  about  six  or  seven 
thousand  verbs  in  our  language,  and  they  are  all,  except  in  the 
past  tense  and  past  participle,  conjugated  like  this.  It  is  in  these 
last  two  parts  that  the  irregular  verbs  vary.  You  cannot  utter  a 
single  sentence,  however  short,  without  a  verb ;  so,  surely,  you 
ought  to  see  this  important  part  of  speech  from  head  to  foot.  Be- 
sides, I  believe  that  our  present  form  of  laying  out  the  verb  is 
simpler  than  it  was  in  Cobbett's  time,  for  the  tenses  are  so  arranged 
that  they  are  more  easily  remembered.     (See  next  page.) 

You  will  notice  that  the  compound  forms  are,  as  Cobbett  says, 
nothing  but  the  past  participle,  worked,  and  the  various  forms  of 
the  verb  to  have.  But  the  seeing  it  will  help  you  to  remember  it. 
As  to  the  tenses,  consider  for  a  moment  how  manj^  kinds  of  time 
there  are  in  nature.  What  is  the  time  called  in  which  you  now 
are?  What  time  is  that  you  had  yesterday?  What  time  is  to- 
morrow? Well,  there  are  three  "kind?,,  present,  past,  and  future; 
and  in  grammar  you  may  say  there  are  really  only  th7-ee  tenses, 
with  a  tail  to  each  of  them,  a  perfect  tail ;  and  this  perfect  tail  is 
the  compound  form  of  the  verb.  It  is  nothing  but  present,  present- 
peifect;  past, -pnal-pe? feet ;  future,  tature-pe7fect.  As  to  the  using 
of  them,  you  will  learn  that  when  we  come  to  the  Syntax.  Then 
you  will  notice  .hat  there  are  five  moods,  just  as  there  are  five  con- 
tinents, five  oceans,  five  races  of  men,  and  five  zones.  Notice  that 
the  subjunctive  has  no  changes  whatever  in  its  endings.  This 
mood,  of  which  common  people  and  common  writers  know  nothing, 
and  which,  some  writers  think,  will  finally  disappear  altogether,  is 


Of  Verbs. 


61 


Complete  conjugation  of  the  acUve  verb  To  Woi-k. 

INFINITIVE  MOOD. 

Present  ten^se—To  work.  Present  perfect  tense— To  have  worked. 

INDICATIVE  MOOU. 

SIMPLE   TENSES.  COMPOUND   TENSES. 

Present  tense .  Present  pe7' feet  tense. 


I  work. 
Thou  workest. 
He  works, 
We  work, 
You  work. 
They  work, 

Pcist  tense. 
I  worked. 
Thou  worked.st, 
He  worked, 
We  worked, 
You  worked. 
They  worked. 

Future  tense. 
I  shall  work. 
Thou  wilt  work. 
He  will  work. 
We  shall  work. 
You  will  work. 
They  will  work. 

Present  tense  conditional 
I  should  work, 
Thouwouldst  work. 
He  would  work, 
We  should  work. 
You  would  work. 
They  would  work. 


Present  tense. 
I  may,  can,  will  work. 
Thou  mayst,  canst,  shalt  work. 
He  may,  can,  shall  work, 
We  may,  can,  sha'l  work. 
You  may,  can,  shall  work. 
They  may,  can,  shall  work. 

Past  tense . 
I  might,  could,  should  work, 


I  have  worked. 
Thou  hast  worked. 
He  has  worked. 
We  have  worked. 
You  have  worked. 
They  have  worked. 

Past  perfect  tense. 
I  had  worked. 
Thou  hadst  worked. 
He  had  worked. 
We  had  worked. 
You  had  worked. 
They  had  worked. 

Future  perfect  tense. 
I  shall  have  worked. 
Thou  wilt  have  worked. 
He  will  have  worked- 
We  shal.  have  worked. 
You  will  have  worked. 
They  will  have  worked. 

Perfect  teiue  conditional. 
I  should  have  worked. 
Thou  wouldst  have  worked. 
He  would  have  worked. 
We  should  have  worked. 
You  would  have  worked. 
They  would  have  worked. 
POTENTIAL  MOOD. 


Present  perfect  tense. 
I  may,  can,  will  have  worked. 


Thou  mayst,  canst,  shalt  have  worked. 
He  may,  can,  shall  have  worked . 
We  may,  can,  shall  have  worked. 
You  may,  can,  shall  have  worked. 
They  may,  can.  shall  have  worked. 

Past  perfect  tense. 
I  might,  could,  should  have  worked. 
Thoiimightst,couldst,shouIdst  work, Thou  mightst,  couldst,  shouldst  have 

worked. 
He  mijht,  couM,  should  have  worked. 
^^'e  mij^ht,  couid,  should  have  worked. 
Youmi^lit,  could,  should  have  worked. 
They  miglit,could, should  have  worked. 
SUBJUNCTI\'E  MOOD. 

Present  p':rfect  tense. 


He  might  could,  should  work. 
We  might,  could,  should  work. 
You  might,  could,  should  work. 
They  might,  could,  should  work. 


Present  tense. 
If  I  work, 

thou  work, 

lie  work, 

we  work, 

you  work, 

they  work. 

Past  tens*. 
If  I  worked. 

thou  worked, 

he  worked, 

we  worked, 

you  worked, 

they  worked, 


Work ! 


Present  particijUe. 
Workmg. 


If  I  have  worked. 
thou  have  worked, 
he  have  worked. 
we  have  v/orked. 
you  have  worked, 
they  have  worked. 
Past  perfect  tense. 
If  I  had  worked, 
thou  had  worked, 
he  had  worked, 
we  had  worked, 
you  had  worked, 
they  had  worked. 
IMPERATIVE  MOOD. 

Work  thou  1 
PARTICIPLES. 
/-"asi  participle.     Present  perfect  (participial  form). 
Worked.  Uaving  worked . 


62  Etymology 

used  to  mark  a  certain  uncertainty  or  contingency  which  the  indic- 
ative cannot  well  mark,  and  is  used  not  only  after  ?"/",  but  after  though,, 
although,  lest,  unless,  provided  tliat,  and  various  other  expressions  in- 
dicating uncertainty.  The  only  verb  in  our  whole  language  which 
makes  a  complete  change  in  the  subjunctive  is  tiic  verb  to  be,  and 
that  becomes  if  I  be,  if  I  were.  Cobbett  follows  the  conjugation  of 
the  French  verb  in  using  the  verb  let  in  the  imperative.  "  Let  me 
work  "  is  not  the  imperative  of  the  verb  to  work,  but  the  imperative 
of  the  verb  to  let ;  as  is  the  case  with  everything  that  follows  let  • 
let  me  eat,  let  me  drink,  let  me  be.  No  English  verb  needs  more 
than  the  one  word  in  the  imperative,  for  the  subject  or  pronoun 
you  is  generally  unexpressed,  or  left  understood.  It  is  sometimes 
used  for  emphasis  or  contrast;  as,  "Work  you!  I  shall  not 
work."  As  to  those  two  great  stumbling-blocks  of  many  persons, 
ihall  and  will,  should  and  would,  all  you  have  to  do  here  is  to  notice 
that,  in  the  future  and  conditional  tenses,  shall  and  should  are  gen- 
erally used  in  the  first  person  singular  and  plural — that  is,  after 
/  and  we — and  that  will  and  would  are  geneeally  used  in  the  other 
persons. 

103.  The  Verbs  to  have  and  to  be  are  of  great  use  in  our 
language.  They  are  called  auxiliary  verbs.  To  let  and  to 
do  are  also  called  auxiliaries,  but  they  are  of  far  less  im- 
portance than  to  h(toe  and  to  be.  Before,  however,  I  say 
more  on  the  subject  of  these  auxiharies,  I  must  speak  of 
all  the  Verbs  as  regular  or  irregular,  just  observing  here 
that  the  word  auxiliary  means  helper,  or  helping. 

104.  Verbs  are  called  regular  when  they  have  their 
changes  or  vai'iations  according  to  a  certain  rule  or 
manner.  Thus:  "I  walk,\  loalked ;  I  work, \  worked.'' 
But  I  cannot  say,  "I  writed.'''  I  must  say,  "I  wrote.'' 
Now  observe  that  we  call  regular  Verbs  all  those  which 
end  their  past  time  of  the  Indicative  and  their  jt9a.ss^u6 
participle  in  ed;  and  if  you  now  look  back  at  the  conju- 
gation of  the  Verb  to  work,  you  will  find  that  it  is  a  regu- 
lar Verb.  Indeed  this  is  the  case  with  almost  all  Verba. 
But  there  are  some  little  irregularities  even  here,  and  they 
must  be  very  well  attended  to,  because  a  want  of  attention 
to  them  leads  to  very  great  errors  even  as  to  spelling. 


Of  Verbs.  63 

105.  These  little  irregulaxities  I  shall  notice  under  five 
separate  heads ;  and  if  you  should  forget,  at  any  time, 
what  has  been  said  on  the  subject,  a  reference  to  these 
■will  in  a  moment  set  you  right. — I.  The  Verb  to  work  is 
•perfectly  regular,  for  it  has  ed  added  to  it  in  order  to 
form  the  past  time,  and  also  in  order  to  form  the  passive 
participle.  It  is  the  same  with  the  Verbs  to  roalk,  to  turn, 
to  abandon,  and  many  others.  But  if  the  Infinitive,  that 
is  to  say,  the  primitive  or  original  word,  end  in  e,  then  d 
only  is  added  ia  the  past  time  and  participle,  and  st  in- 
stead of  est  after  thou  ;  as  in  the  case  of  to  move,  which 
becomes  moved  and  movest.  You  have  seen,  also,  in  the 
case  of  the  Verb  to  work,  that  we  add  only  an  s  to  form 
the  third  person  singular  of  the  present  of  the  Indicative ; 
he  works.  But  if  the  Infinitive  end  in  A,  s,  x,  or  z,  then  es 
must  be  added;  as,  to  wish,  he  wishes  ;  to  toss,  he  tosses , 
to  box,  he  boxes;  to  buzz,  he  buzzes. — II.  When  the  Infini- 
tive ends  in  y,  and  when  that  y  has  a  consonant  imme- 
diately before  it,  the  y  is  changed  into  ie,  to  form  the  third 
person  singular  of  the  present  of  the  Indicative ;  as  to 
reply,  he  replies.  But  (and  I  beg  you  to  mark  it  well)  if 
the  ending  y  have  a  vo^'.el  immediately  before  it,  the  Verb 
follows  the  general  rule  in  the  formation  of  the  third 
person  singular  of  the  present  of  the  Indicative;  as  to 
delay,  he  delays;  and  not  he  delaies.  It  is  the  same  in. 
the  second  person  singular ;  as,  to  reply,  thou  repliest,  to 
delay,  thou  delay  est.  —III.  "When  the  Infinitive  ends  in  y 
with  a  consonant  immediately  before  it,  the  past  time  of 
the  Indicative  and  the  passive  participle  are  formed  by 
using  an  i  instead  of  the  y ;  as,  to  reply,  he  replied;  to 
deny,  it  was  denied.  But  if  the  y  be  preceded  by  a 
vowel,  ed  is  added  to  the  y  in  the  usual  manner ;  as,  to 
delay,  he  delayed. — IV.  The  active  participle,  which 
always  ends  in  ing,  ia  in  general  formed  by  simply  adding 
the  ing  to  the  Infinitive ;  as,  to  work,  working ;  to  talk, 
talking.     But  if  the  Infinitive  end  in  a  single  e,  the  e  is 


64  Etymology 

dropped ;  as,  to  tnove,  movrng.  The  Verb  to  be  is  an  ex- 
ception to  this;  but  then  that  is  an  irregularYevh.  It  is 
Say  silent  e,  and  the  rule  will  hold  good  throughout.  The 
e  is  not  silent  in  be,  and  is  therefore  not  dropped  in  being.  It  is 
never  retained,  even  where  one  part  of  speech  is  converted  into 
another,  except  where  the  omission  of  it  might  cause  a  doubtful 
pronunciation;  as,  peace,  peaceable;  change,  changeable. 

when  the  Infinitive  ends  in  a  single  e,  mind ;  for  if  the  6 
be  double,  the  general  rule  is  followed ;  as,  tofree^freekig, 
"When  the  infinitive  ends  in  i'e,  those  letters  are  cLangecJ 
into  y  in  the  forming  of  the  active  participle .,  as,  to  lie^ 
lying. — ^V.  When  the  Infinitive  ends  in  a  sin^U  consonant^ 
which  has  a  single  voicel  imtnediately  before  it,  the  final 
consonant  is  doubled,  not  only  in  fori^ng  the  active  ptu-- 
ticiple,  but  also  in  forming  the  past  *nne  of  the  Indicative, 
and  the  passive  participle  ;  as,  to  fap,  rapping  ;  I  rapped., 
it  was  rapped.  But,  observe  well,  this  rule  holds  good 
only  as  to  words  of  one  syllable  /  for  if  the  Infinitive  of 
the  Verb  have  more  than  one  syllable,  the  consonant  is 
not  doubled  unless  the  accent  be  on  the  last  syllable;  and 
the  accent  means  the  main  force,  weight,  or  sound  of 
the  voice  in  pronouncing  the  word.  For  instance,  in  thq 
word  to  open,  the  accent  is  on  the  Jirst  syllable ;  and 
therefore  we  write,  opening,  opened.  But  when  we  come 
to  the  Verb  to  refer,  where  we  find  the  accent  on  the  last 
syllable,  we  write,  referring,  referred. 

It  is,  perhaps,  worth  while  noticing  that  these  are  principles 
that  apply  not  only  to  the  verbs,  but  to  various  other  parts  of 
speech;  in  fact,  principles  that  run  through  the  whole  language. 
Just  as,  with  nouns,  the  Word  ending  in  y  preceded  by  a  consonant 
changes  the  y  into  ie  (lady,  ladies),  but  does  not  change  the  y  if 
preceded  by  a  vowel  (valley,  valleys) ;  so  with  verbs,  I  carry,  he 
carries;  I  obey,  he  obeys;  so  with  adjectives,  happy,  happier;  gay, 
gayer.  And  as  we  have  seen  that  adjectives  of  one  syllable,  ending 
in  a  consonant  preceded  by  a  single  vowel  double  the  consonant  in 
the  comparative  and  superlative  degrees  (hot,  hotter,  hottest),  but 
do  not  do  so  if  preceded  by  a  double  vowel  or  by  none  at  all  (neat, 
neater ;  rich,  richer),  so  it  is  with  verbs,  of  similar  ending,  in  the 


Of  Verbs.  65 

past  tense  aud  in  the  participles,  rap,  rapped,  rapping;  cheat, 
cheated,  cheating:  work,  worked,  working.  It  is  something  that 
is  demanded  by  the  pronunciation  of  the  words ;  for  if  we  did  not 
double  the  final  consonant  in  words  of  this  kind,  we  should  have 
to  say  Tto'ter  instead  of  Jiot'ter,  raping  instead  of  rapping.  And 
this  reminds  me  to  say  that  it  is  of  the  utmost  importance  for  you 
to  study  and  understand  the  marking  and  accentuation  of  words 
in  the  dictionary;  for  if  you  wish  to  pronounce  the  English 
language  correctly,  you  will  find  it  necessary  to  consult  the  dic- 
tionary very  frequently.  The  most  learned  Englishman  or  Ameri- 
can that  lives,  or  has  ever  lived — not  excepting  Doctor  Johnson  or 
Noah  Webster  himself — is,  or  has  been,  constantly  obliged  to  con- 
sult the  dictionary  for  the  coiTCct  pronunciation  of  English  woi-ds. 
How  different,  in  this  respect,  is  the  German  language!  In  that 
language  there  is  but  one  single  word  irregularly  pronounced; 
le-ben'-dig,  instead  of  le'-ben-dig,  like  le  ben.  And  as  to  the  mean- 
ing, every  German  word  explains  itself;  so  that  no  German  boy  or 
man  need  ever  look  into  a  dictionary  to  find  out  tlie  meaning  or 
the  pronunciation  of  a  word  in  his  language.  Every  word  in  thai 
language  is  spelled,  too,  as  it  is  pronounced.  But  the  gram- 
matical construction  of  the  language  is  far  more  difficult  than 
ours.  Mr.  White  confesses  that,  in  order  to  learn  German,  the 
grammar  of  the  language  must  be  studied.  I  will  go  so  far  as  to 
say,  that  an  Englishman  or  American  who  studies  the  grammar  of 
that  language  thoroughly  well,  will  never  need  much  further  study 
of  the  grammar  of  his  mother-tongue. 

106.  These  irregularities,  though  very  necessary  to  be 
attended  to,  do  not  prevent  us  from  considering  the 
Verbs  which  are  subject  to  them  as  regular  Verbs.  The 
mai'k  of  a  regular  Verb  is  that  iis  past  time  and  passive 
participle  end  in  ed ;  every  Verb  which  does  not  answer 
to  this  mark  is  irregular. 

107.  There  ai'e  many  of  these  irregular  Verbs,  of 
which  I  shall  here  insert  a  complete  Hst.  All  the  UTeg- 
ularities  (except  the  Httle  in-egulaiities  just  mentioned) 
which  it  is  possible  to  find  in  an  English  Verb  (the  auxil- 
iary Verbs  excepted)  are  in  the  past  time  and  thepassive 
participle  only.  Therefore,  it  will  be  sufficient  to  give  a 
list,  showing,  in  those  two  instances,  what  are  the  iiTeg- 
ularities  of  each  Verb;  and,  in  order  to  render  this  list 


66 


Etymology 


convenient,  and  to  shorten  the  work  of  referring  to  it,  I 
shall  make  it  alphabetical.  With  the  past  time  and  the 
passive  participle  of  the  several  "Verbs  I  shall  use  the  first 
person  singular  of  the  pronoun,  in  order  to  make  my 
examples  as  clear  as  possible. 


LIST   OF  IRREGUIiAK  VERBS. 


INFINITIVB. 

to  abide, 
to  be, 
to  bear, 
to  beat, 
to  become, 
to  befall, 
to  beget, 
to  begin, 
to  behold, 
to  bend, 
to  beseech, 
to  bid, 
to  bind, 
to  bite, 
to  bleed, 
to  break, 
to  breed, 
to  bring, 
to  buy, 
to  catch, 
to  choose, 
to  cleave, 
to  come, 
to  cost, 
to  cut, 
to  die, 
to  do, 
to  drink, 


PAST  TIME. 

I  abode, 
I  was, 
I  bore, 
I  beat, 
I  became, 
it  befell, 
I  begot, 
I  began, 
I  beheld, 
I  bended, 
I  besought, 
I  bade, 
I  bound, 
I  bit, 
I  bled, 
I  broke, 
I  bred, 
I  brought, 
I  bought, 
I  caught, 
I  chose, 
I  clove, 
I  came, 
I  cost, 
I  cut, 
I  died, 
I  did, 
I  drank, 


PAETICIPLK8. 

I  have  abode. 

"  been. 

"  borne. 

"  beaten. 

"  become, 
it  has  befallen. 

I  have  begotten. 

"  begun. 

"  beheld. 

"  bent. 

"  besought. 

"  bidden. 

"  bound. 

"  bitten. 

"  bled. 

"  broken. 

"  bred. 

"  brought. 

"  bought. 

"  caught. 

"  chosen- 

"  cloven. 

"  come. 

"  cost. 

"  cut. 

"  died. 

"  done. 

'*  drunk. 


Of  Verbs. 


67 


rNFINTTIVK. 

to  drive, 
to  eat, 
to  fall, 
to  feed, 
to  feel, 
to  fight, 
to  find, 
to  flee, 
to  fliBg, 
to  fly, 
to  forbear, 
to  forbid, 
to  forget, 
to  forgive, 
to  forsake, 
to  get, 
to  g^ve, 
to  go, 
to  grind, 
to  have, 
to  hear, 
to  hide, 
to  hit, 
to  hold, 
to  hui't, 
to  keep, 
to  know, 
to  lay, 
to  lead, 
to  leave, 
to  lend, 
to  let, 
to  lie, 
to  lose, 
to  make, 


PAST  TIME 

I  drove, 
I  ate, 
I  fell, 
I  fed, 
I  felt, 
I  fought, 
I  found, 
liied, 
I  flung, 
I  flew, 
I  forbore, 
I  forbade, 
I  forgot, 
I  forgave, 
I  forsook, 
I  got, 
I  gave, 
I  went, 
I  ground, 
I  had, 
I  heard, 
I  hid, 
I  hit, 
I  held, 
I  hiu't, 
I  kept, 
I  knew, 
I  laid, 
lied, 
I  left, 
I  lent, 
I  let, 
Hay, 
I  lost, 
I  made, 


PABTIOIPLBS. 

I  have  driven. 

"  eaten. 

"  fallen. 

"  fed. 

"  felt. 

"  fought. 

"  found. 

''  fled. 

"  flung. 

''  flown. 

"  forborne. 

*'  forbidden. 

"  forgotten. 

"  forgiven. 

"  forsaken. 

"  gotten. 

"  given. 

"  gone. 

"  gi'ound. 

"  had. 

"  heard. 

"  hidden. 

"  hit. 

'•  held. 

"  hurt. 

"  kept. 

"  known. 

"  laid. 

"  led. 

"  left. 

"  lent. 

"  let. 

"  lain. 

"  lost. 

"  made. 


68 

Etymology 

INFINITIVB. 

PAST  TIMB. 

PARTICIPLK8. 

to  meet, 

I  met, 

I  have  met. 

to  overcome, 

I  overcame, 

a 

overcoma 

to  overdo, 

I  overdid, 

u 

overdone. 

to  pay. 

I  paid, 

(( 

paid. 

to  put. 

I  put, 

u 

put. 

to  read, 

I  read. 

(( 

read. 

to  rend, 

I  rent. 

u 

rent. 

to  ride, 

I  rode. 

(( 

ridden. 

to  ring, 

I  rang. 

li 

rung. 

to  rise. 

I  rose, 

(( 

risen. 

to  run. 

I  ran, 

li 

run. 

to  say, 

I  said. 

il 

said. 

to  see, 

I  save. 

u 

seen. 

to  seek. 

I  sought, 

(( 

sought. 

to  sell. 

I  sold. 

u 

sold. 

to  send. 

I  sent, 

u 

sent. 

to  set. 

I  set, 

u 

set. 

to  shake. 

I  shook. 

u 

shaken. 

to  shear, 

I  sheared. 

ti 

shorn. 

to  shed. 

I  shed. 

il 

shed. 

to  show. 

I  showed, 

<( 

shown. 

to  shrink, 

I  shrank, 

11 

shrunk. 

to  shoe. 

I  shod. 

<( 

shod. 

to  shoot, 

I  shot. 

(( 

shot. 

to  shut, 

I  shut, 

(( 

shut. 

to  sing, 

I  sang, 

a 

sung. 

to  sink, 

I  sank. 

(( 

sunk. 

to  sit, 

I  sat, 

(( 

sat. 

to  slay, 

I  slew, 

(( 

slain. 

to  sleep. 

I  slept, 

« 

slept. 

to  shde, 

I  shd, 

'• 

slidden. 

to  sht, 

I  sht. 

« 

slit. 

to  smite, 

I  smote, 

a 

smitten. 

to  speak, 

I  spoke, 

li 

spoken. 

to  speed, 

I  sped, 

u 

sped. 

Of  Verbs. 


69 


INFINITIVE. 

PAST  TIMB. 

PAKTI0IPLB8. 

to  spend, 

I  spent. 

I  have  spent. 

to  Bpin, 

I  span. 

u 

spun. 

to  spit, 

I  spat, 

(( 

spat. 

to  spread. 

I  spread. 

a 

spread. 

to  stand, 

I  stood. 

a 

stood. 

to  steal, 

I  stole. 

a 

stolen. 

to  stick. 

I  stuck. 

u 

stuck. 

to  stink. 

I  stunk. 

u 

stnnk. 

to  strike. 

I  struck. 

ii. 

stricken. 

to  swear, 

I  swore. 

u 

sworn. 

to  take, 

I  took, 

t; 

taken. 

to  teach, 

I  taught, 

a 

taught. 

to  tear. 

I  tore, 

u 

torn. 

to  tell, 

I  told. 

(C 

told. 

to  think, 

I  thought, 

a 

thought. 

to  tread, 

I  trod. 

(( 

trodden. 

to  understand. 

I  understood, 

u 

understood. 

to  wear, 

I  wore, 

a 

worn. 

to  win. 

I  won. 

u 

won. 

to  wind, 

I  wound. 

a 

wound. 

to  write, 

I  wrote, 

u 

written. 

108.  It  is  usual  with  grammarians  to  insert  several 
Verbs  in  their  List  of  Irregulars  which  I  have  not 
inserted  here.  But  I  have,  in  the  above  Hst,  placed 
evei'y  Verb  in  otu'  language  which  is  really  irregular. 
However,  I  will  here  subjoin  a  list  of  those  Verbs  which 
are,  by  some  grammarians,  reckoned  irregvilar  ;  and  then 
I  will  show  you,  not  only  that  they  are  not  irregulai", 
strictly  speaking,  but  that  you  ought  by  all  means  to  use 
ihem  in  a  regular  form. 


70 


Etymology 


LIST    OF    VERBS    WHICH,    BY     SOME     PERSONS,    ARE    ERRONEOUSLY 
DEEMED    IRREGTTLARS. 


INFINITIVE. 

PAST  TIME. 

PABTIOIPLES. 

to  awake, 

I  awoke, 

I  have  awaked. 

to  bereave, 

I  bereft, 

(( 

bereft. 

to  blow, 

I  blew. 

(( 

blown. 

to  build, 

I  built. 

(( 

buUt. 

to  bum. 

I  burnt, 

ii 

burnt. 

to  burst, 

I  burst. 

(( 

burst. 

to  cast, 

I  cast. 

(( 

cast. 

to  chide, 

I  chid, 

u 

chidden. 

to  cling, 

I  clung. 

(( 

clung. 

to  creep, 

I  crept. 

it 

crept. 

to  crow, 

I  crew, 

u 

crowed. 

to  curse, 

I  curst, 

(( 

CVU'st. 

to  daie, 

I  dared, 

(( 

dared. 

to  deal, 

I  dealt. 

a 

dealt. 

to  dig. 

I  dug, 

(1 

dug. 

to  dip, 

I  dipt. 

u 

dipt. 

to  draw, 

I  drew, 

(( 

drawn. 

to  dream, 

I  dreamt. 

(( 

dreamt. 

to  dwell. 

I  dwelt, 

i( 

dwelt. 

to  freeze, 

I  froze, 

(( 

frozen. 

to  geld, 

I  gelt, 

(( 

gelt. 

to  gild. 

I  gilt. 

41 

gilt. 

to  gird, 

I  girt. 

(1 

girt. 

to  grow. 

I  grew. 

(k 

grown. 

to  bang, 

I  hung. 

li 

hung. 

to  help. 

I  helpt, 

" 

helpt. 

to  hew, 

I  hewed. 

(( 

hewn. 

to  kneel. 

I  knelt. 

<t 

knelt. 

to  knit, 

I  knit. 

• 

knit. 

to  lade. 

I  laded. 

« 

laden. 

to  leap. 

I  leaped, 

(( 

leapt. 

to  light. 

Iht, 

i( 

Hghted. 

Of  Verbs. 


71 


INFINITIVE. 

PAST  TIMB. 

PAKTIOIPLBS. 

to  load, 

I  loaded. 

I  have  loaden  or  laden 

to  mean. 

I  meant, 

I  have  meant. 

to  mow, 

I  mowed, 

(( 

mown. 

to  overflow. 

I  overflowed. 

<( 

overflown. 

to  saw. 

I  sawed, 

(( 

sawn. 

to  shave. 

I  shaved, 

(( 

shaven. 

to  shred, 

I  shred, 

(( 

shi-ed. 

to  shine, 

I  shone. 

u 

shone. 

to  sling. 

I  slung, 

(( 

slung. 

to  sHnk, 

I  slunk, 

(( 

slunk. 

to  shp. 

I  slipt, 

« 

shpt. 

to  smell, 

I  smelt. 

u 

smelt. 

to  snow. 

it  snowed, 

it  has 

snown. 

to  sow, 

I  sowed. 

I  have 

sown. 

to  spell. 

I  spelt, 

(( 

spelt. 

to  spill. 

I  s;)ilt. 

u 

spilt. 

to  spUt, 

I  split. 

(C 

split. 

to  spring. 

I  sprang. 

(( 

sprung. 

to  stamp, 

I  stampt. 

(( 

stampt. 

to  sting, 

I  stung, 

a 

stung. 

to  strew. 

I  screwed, 

a 

strewn. 

to  strow, 

I  8  trowed. 

11 

strown. 

to  stride, 

I  strode, 

u 

stridden. 

to  string. 

I  strung, 

(; 

strung. 

to  strip, 

I  stript. 

i( 

stript^ 

to  strive. 

I  strove, 

it 

striven. 

to  sweep. 

I  swept, 

11 

swept. 

to  swell. 

I  swelled, 

(( 

swollen. 

to  swim. 

I  swam, 

'• 

swum. 

to  swing. 

I  swung. 

ii 

swung 

to  thrive. 

I  throve. 

a 

thriven 

to  throw. 

I  threw. 

Cl 

thrown. 

to  thrust. 

I  thrust. 

a 

thrust. 

to  wax. 

I  waxed. 

« 

waxen. 

to  weave, 

I  wove, 

u 

woven. 

72  Etymology 

INFrNTTIVK.  PAST  TIME.  PARTI0IPLK8. 

to  weep,  I  wept,  I  have  wept, 

to  whip,  I  whipt,  "       whipt. 

109.  The  greater  part  of  these  verbs  have  become 
irregular  by  the  bad  practice  of  abbreviating  or  shorten- 
ing in  writing.  We  are  always  given  to  cut  our  words 
short;  and,  with  very  few  exceptions,  you  find  people 
writing  lo'o'd^  mov'd,  waWd ;  instead  of  loved,  moved, 
walked.  They  wish  to  make  the  pe7i  correspond  with  the 
tongue  /  but  they  ought  not  then  to  write  the  word  the 
at  full  length,  nor  the  word  of,  nor  any  other  little  word ; 
for  scarcely  ever  are  these  words  fully  sounded  in  speak- 
ing. From  lov'd,  movd,  waWd,  it  is  very  easy  to  slide 
into  lovt,  77iovt,  wallet.  And  this  has  been  the  case  with 
regard  to  curst,  dealt,  dwelt,  leapt,  helpt,  and  many  others 
in  the  last  inserted  list.  It  is  just  as  proper  to  ssLjJumpt, 
as  it  is  to  say  leapt/  and  just  as  proj)er  to  say  walkt  as 
either ;  and  thus  we  might  go  on,  till  the  orthography  of 
the  whole  language  were  changed.  When  the  love  of 
contraction  came  to  operate  on  such  Verbs  as  to  hurst  and 
to  light,  it  found  such  a  clump  of  consonants  akeady  at  the 
end  of  the  words  that  it  could  add  none.  It  could  not  en- 
able the  organs  even  of  English  speech  to  pronounce 
bursfd,  light' d.  It  therefore  made  really  short  work  of  it, 
and,  dropping  the  last  syllable  altogether,  wrote  burst  and 
light  in  the  past  time  and  passive  participle.  But  is  it  not 
more  hai-monious,  as  well  as  more  correct,  to  say,  "  the 
bubble  is  almost  bursted,'''  than  it  is  to  say,  "  The  bubble 
is  almost  burst?  "  And  as  to  hang,  is  it  not  better  to  say 
hanged  than  hung?  "  I  will  be  hanged  if  I  do,"  is  a  very 
common  phrase,  and  is  it  not  better  than  it  would  be  to 
say,  "  I  will  be  hung  if  I  do  ?  "  Many  of  these  Verbs,  by 
being  very  difficult  to  contract,  have,  as  in  the  case  of  to 
hang,  to  swing,  and  the  like,  reduced  the  shorteners  to 
the  necessity  of   changing  almost  all  the  letters  of  the 


Of  Verbs.  73 

words ;  as,  to  dare,  durst  /  but  is  it  not  better  to  saj  I 
dared  than  I  durst?  This  habit  of  contracting  or  Bhort- 
ening  is  a  very  mischievous  habit.  It  leads  to  the  de- 
struction of  all  propriety  in  the  uae  of  letters ;  and  instead 
of  a  saving  of  time,  it  produces,  by  ihe  puzzling  that  it 
gives  rise  to,  a  great  loss  of  time.  Hoping  that  what  I 
have  here  said  will  be  a  warning  to  you  against  the  cutting 
of  words  short,  I  have  only  to  add,  on  the  subject  of  ir- 
regular verbs,  that  those  in  the  last  list  are  to  be  used  in 
the  regidar  form,  and  that  the  only  real  irregulai'S  are 
those  of  the  fii'st  list.  Nay,  I  have,  after  all,  left  some 
Verbs  in  the  first  hst  which  m,ay  be  used  in  the  regular 
form ;  as,  pas^,  which  may  be,  in  the  participle,  j^assed,  and 
with  full  as  much  propriety. 

The  fact  that  this  second  series  of  verbs,  which  Cobbett  declares 
ought  to  be  used  in  the  regular  form,  are  now  almost  all  used  in 
that  form,  is  a  pretty  good  proof  of  the  soundness  of  his  judgment. 
Tnere  is  a  strong  tendency  now-a-days  to  make  irregular  verbs 
regular,  as  well  as  to  make  irregaiarly-pronounced  words  regular. 
Mr.  White  is  singular  in  his  notions  on  this  subject.  He  dislikes  all 
departm-es  from  old-estaolistied  pronunciations ;  calls  them  "  book- 
talk,  not  free,  manly  speech."  Though  the  people  of  the  town  of 
Derby,  for  instance,  pronounce  the  name  of  their  town  just  as  it  is 
spelled,  he  thinks  the  aristocratic  pronunciation  "Darby"  is  the 
proper  one,  because  it  has  support  in  other  words  pronounced  in  the 
old  style,  such  as  dark  for  clerk,  dargy  for  dergy,  sarjeant  for  serjeant. 
And  yet  he  seems  to  agree  with  Walker  that  vurgin  and  vurtue 
instead  of  virgin  and  virtue  have  ' '  a  grossness  approaching  to  vul- 
garity !  "  Is  not  the  one  just  as  bad  as  the  other  ?  nay,  worse ;  for 
the  i  in  these  words,  like  that  in  thirst  and  girl,  has,  in  everybody's 
mouth,  something  of  the  sound  of  the  u.  Ought  we,  in  order 
to  satisfy  a  peculiarity  or  nicety  of  taste,  to  retain  an  irregular 
pronunciation  in  particular  words,  which  gives  endless  trouble  to 
thousands  of  teachers  and  millions  of  children  ?  I  am  all  the  more 
surprised  at  this  peculiar  notion  of  Mr.  White's,  as  he  seems  willing 
to  abolish  every  change  in  the  ending  of  words  in  order  to  simplify 
the  grammar :  even  the  m  in  whom  he  is  willing  to  discard.  There  is 
no  use  in  talking  about  it;  it  is  quite  natural  that  a  practical,  pro- 
gressive, reading  people  like  the  Americana  should  pronounce 
words  as  they  are  spelled.  We  no  longer  hear  housewife  pro- 
4 


74  Etymology 

nounced  hmzif,  as  in  England ;  or,  haunt  pronounced  hant.  Nor 
do  I  think  there  i«  any  loss  whatever,  but  a  gain,  in  so  pro- 
nouncing. "Derby"  sounds  just  as  good  as  "Darby,"  "clerk" 
as  good  as  "dark;"  "Berkeley"  as  "Barkeley." 

Simplicity  is,  in  fact,  the  order  of  the  day ;  it  is  the  tendency  of 
the  age  in  all  thiix^s ;  for  modern  progress,  modern  ideas,  are  ren- 
dering all  mankind  more  neighborly,  more  brotherly,  more 
nearly  akin  to  each  other.  Mr.  White  is  inclined  to  think  that 
those  we  call  irregular  verbs  are  the  real  strong  ones,  and  tlie 
others  the  weak.  I  notice  that  my  little  girl,  five  years  old,  fre- 
quently makes  irregular  verbs  regular  (I  drinked,  I  eated,  etc.), 
although  she  never  hears  them  so  used.  This  to  me  is  a  proof 
that  there  is  a  natural  tendency  in  the  language  to  regularity  of 
construction.  And  indeed  there  is  a  reason  for  this  change,  as  for 
all  changes,  in  our  language — a  satisfactory,  a  compensatory 
reason ;  for  most  of  the  old  irregular  forms  are  needed  for  other 
and  different  service :  they  are  wanted  for  quaJificative  and  figiu*a- 
tive  use.  Let  us  take  some  of  these  very  verbs  in  the  second  list- 
to  burn,  to  chide,  to  gild,  to  gird,  to  hew,  to  load,  to  shave,  to 
spill,  to  weave — and  we  shall  see  that  though  used  in  the  regular 
form  as  verbs,  the  irregular  form  is  used  as  adjectives.  I 
burned  the  cork;  here  is  burnt  cork; — he  chided  the  children; 
there  they  go,  like  a  chidden  train ; — she  gilded  the  faces  of  the 
sleepers ;  she  wears  gilt  lace ;  — he  girded  himself  for  the  combat ; 
here  is  a  sea-girt  isle ; — he  hewed  the  stone ;  here  is  a  temple  built 
of  hewn  stone ;  and  so  on.  Though  we  speak  of  having  worked 
hard,  of  having  melted  the  ice,  and  of  having  swelled  the  tide  of 
prosperity,  yet  we  speak  of  vsTought  iron,  of  a  swollen  flood,  and 
of  molten  lead.  Though  we  say  that  "  she  knitted  the  stockings" 
and  "he  freighted  the  vessel,"  we  say  that  "her  brows  were  knit" 
and  "the  enterprise  was  fraught  with  misfortune."  Thus  we  see 
that  the  irregular  form  of  the  verb  has  been  turned  into  an  adjec- 
tive, and  the  regular  form  retained  as  a  verb. 

The  old  form  is  also  needed  to  form  nouns  as  well  as  adjectives. 
"During  the  past  year,  he  has  often  passed  me  without  a  glance ; 
but,  never  mind ;  the  past  is  forgotten."  And  the  old  form  is 
sometimes  used  to  show  a  difference  of  meaning  as  compared  with 
the  regular  form;  for  "he  durst  not  do  it"  is  quite  a  different 
thing  from  "he  dared  not  do  it;"  the  former  indicating  that  he 
had  not  the  permission  to  do  it,  and  the  latter  that  he  had  not  the 
courage.— Having  forgotten  what  Cobbett  said  above  of  the  verb 
to  pass,  I  struck  it  out  of  the  list  of  irregulars,  as  it  is  never  now 


Of  Verbs.  75 

used  irregularly.     Otherwise  I  should  have  let  it  stand.     It  is, 
however,  the  only  verb  I  did  strike  out. 

110.  Auxiliary  Verbs. — In  the  present  Letter,  para- 
graph 103,  I  opened  this  pai"t  of  my  subject.  The  word 
let  is  the  past  time  and  the  passive  participle  of  the  Verb 
to  let.  It  is  used  as  an  auxiliary,  however,  in  the  present 
time;  and  only  in  the  imperative  mode;  as.  Let  me  go; 
let  us  go;  let  him  go.  That  is  to  say,  Leave  me  to  go, 
leave  us  to  go,  leave  him,  to  go.  Perhaps  the  meaning, 
fully  expressed,  would  be,  Act  in  such  a  way  that  I  may 
be  left  to  go,  or  suffered  to  go. 

The  peculiarity  of  this  verb  to  let  is,  that  like  a  dozen  other  irreg- 
ular verbs,  it  may  be  used  in  all  the  tenses  without  undergoing  any 
change  of  form ;  as,  I  let  him  come  now ;  I  let  him  come  yesterday ; 
I  have  let  him  come.  I  put  it  away  now ;  I  put  it  away  yesterday; 
I  have  put  it  away.     So  with  cut,  cast,  hit,  and  others. 

111.  The  auxihary  do,  which,  for  the  past  time,  be- 
comes did,  is  part  of  the  Verb  to  do,  which  in  its  past 
time  is  did,  and  in  its  passive  participle  done.  In  this 
sense,  it  is  not  an  auxiliary,  but  a  principal  Verb,  and  its 
meaning  is  equal  to  that  of  to  execute,  or  to  perform;  as, 
I  do  my  work,  I  execute  my  work,  I  perform  my  work. 
As  an  auxihary  or  helper,  it  seems  to  denote  the  time  of 
the  principal  Verb ;  as,  I  do  walk ;  I  did  walk ;  and,  we 
may  say,  I  do  execute  my  work,  or,  I  do  do  my  work.  In 
this  last  example,  the  fii-st  do  is  an  auxihary,  and  the  last 
do  a  principal  Verb.  However,  as  I  said  before,  do  and 
did,  used  as  auxiharies,  do  a  great  deal  more  than  merely 
express  titne.  In  fact,  they  are  not  often  used  for  that 
pxirpose  only.  They  are  used  for  the  purpose  of  afl^'ming 
or  denying  in  a  manner  pecuHaily  strong ;  as,  I  do  work, 
means,  that  I  work,  notwithstanding  all  that  may  be,  or 
may  have  been  said,  or  thought,  to  the  contrary;  or  it 
means,  that  I  work  now,  and  have  not  done  it  at  some 
other  stated  or  supposed  time.  It  is  the  same,  with  the 
exception   of  time,   as   to   the   use   of  did.     These   aie 


76  Etymology 

amongst  those  little  words  of  vast  import,  the  proper 
force  and  use  of  which  foreigners  scaa'cely  ever  learn,  and 
which  we  learn  from  our  very  infancy. 

This  is,  I  think,  the  proper  place  to  state  that  the  English  verb 
has,  in  fact,  five  forms  in  the  present  tense — something  which,  I 
believe,  is  not  found  in  the  verbs  of  any  other  modern  tongue : 

He  works,  common  form. 

He  is  working,  progressive  form. 

He  does  work,  emphatic  form. 

He  worketh,  solemn  form. 

He  doth  work,  solemn  emphatic  form. 

All  these  forms  convey  a  different  shade  of  meaning,  and  are 
used  under  different  circumstances,  which  will  be  explained  by- 
aud-by.  I  will  only  say  here  that  the  first  three  are  the  most  fre- 
quently used.  The  French  and  the  Germans  have  only  one  form 
for  the  whole  five :  il  travaille,  er  arbeitet.  They  have,  it  is  true, 
the  progressive  form,  too,  but  it  is  seldom  used  by  the  French  and 
Jiardly  ever  by  the  Germans. 

Now,  concerning  do,  you  must  notice  that,  as  an  auxiliary,  it  is 
used  chiefly  in  negative  and  iNTERROGATrvE  sentences : 

He  works,  he  is  working,  affirmative. 

He  does  not  work,  negative. 

Does  he  work  ?  interrogative. 
It  is  never  used  in  affirmative  sentences  except  for  emphasis. 
The  French  and  the  Germans,  for  the  last  two  forms,  simply  say: 
He  works  not.  Works  he  ?  We  use  this  form  when  we  speak  sol- 
emnly or  earnestly :  He  works  not ;  He  comes  not ;  I  see  him  not. 
Notice  that  when  any  other  auxiliary  is  used  (have,  be,  must,  may, 
etc.),  we  cannot  use  do  in  either  negative  or  interrogative  sentences : 
"  I  have  not  seen  him.  He  must  not  go.  Am  I  your  friend?  May 
I  speak?"  To  say,  therefore,  "  I  did  not  have  a  penny,"  is  not  bo 
good  as,  "I  had  not  a  penny." 

112.  The  Verbs  to  have  and  to  be  oxe  the  two  great 
auxiharies.  These  words  demand  an  extraordinaiy  por- 
tion of  your  attention.  They  ai'e  principal  Verbs  as  well 
as  auxiliai-ies.  The  Verb  to  have,  as  a  principal  Verb, 
signifies  possession  /  as,  I  have  a  pen,  that  is  to  say,  / 
possess  a  pen.  Then,  this  is  a  word  of  very  great  use  in- 
deed in  its  capacity  of  principal  Verb ;  for  we  say,  J  have 
a  headache,  I  have  a  hatred  of  such  a  thing,  /  have  a 


Of  Verbs.  TT 

mind  to  go  ;  and  hundreds  of  similar  phrases.  I  possess 
a  headache  has  the  same  mea?iinff  /  but  the  other  is  more 
agreeable  to  the  natural  turn  of  our  language.  As  aux 
iliary,  this  Verb  is  absolutely  necessary  in  forming  what 
are  called  the  compound  times  of  other  Verbs,  and  those 
times  aie  called  compound  because  they  are  formed  of  two 
or  ino7'e  Verbs.  Suppose  the  subject  to  be  of  my  workingj 
and  that  I  want  to  tell  you  that  my  work  is  ended,  that  I 
have  closed  my  work,  I  cannot,  in  a  short  manner,  tell  you 
this  without  the  help  of  the  Verb  to  have.  To  say,  Jtoorky 
or  J  worked,  or  J  will  work  /  these  will  not  answer  my 
purpose.  No :  I  must  call  in  the  help  of  the  Verb  to  have, 
and  tell  you  I  have  worked.  So,  in  the  case  of  the  past 
time,  I  must  say,  I  had  worked;  in  the  future,  I  shall 
have  worked ;  in  the  subjunctive  mode,  I  must  say,  I  may, 
might,  could,  or  should  have  worked.  If  you  reflect  a 
little,  you  will  find  a  clear  reason  for  employing  the  Verb 
to  have  in  this  way ;  for  when  I  say,  " I  have  worked,''''  vaj 
words  amount  to  this :  that  the  o.ct  of  working  is  now  in 
my  possession.  It  is  completed.  It  is  a  thing  I  oton,  and 
therefore  I  say,  I  have  it. 

113.  The  Verb  to  be  signifies  existence,  when  used  as  a 
principal  Verb.  "  To  be  ill,  to  be  well,  to  be  rich,  to  be 
poor,"  mean  to  exist  in  illness,  in  health,  in  riches,  in  pov- 
erty. This  Verb,  in  its  compound  times,  requires  the  help 
of  the  Verb  to  have ;  as,  I  have  been,  I  had  been,  I  shall 
have  been,  and  so  on.  As  auxiliary,  this  Verb  is  used 
with  the  participles  of  other  Verbs ;  as,  to  be  working,  he 
is  working,  it  is  worked.  Now  you  will  perceive,  if  you 
reflect,  that  these  phrases  mean  as  follows:  existing  in 
work,  he  exists  in  work,  it  exists  iii  a  worked  state.  Both 
these  Verbs  are  sometimes  used,  at  one  and  the  same 
time,  as  auxiharies  to  other  principal  Verbs/  as,  I  have 
been  writing ;  I  have  been  imprisoned ;  and  so  on;  and, 
upon  patient  attention  to  what  has  akeady  been  said,  you 
will  find  that  they  retain  upon  all  occasions  their  full 


78 


Etymology 


meaning,  of  possession  in  the  one  case,  sind  of  existence  in 
the  other. 

114.  Now,  my  dear  James,  if  I  have  succeeded  in  mak- 
ing clear  to  you  the  principle  out  of  which  the  use  of 
these  words,  as  auxiliaries,  has  arisen,  I  have  accomplished 
a  great  deal ;  for,  if  well  grounded  in  that  principle,  all 
the  subsequent  difficulties  will  speedily  vanish  before  you. 

115.  I  now  proceed  to  close  this  long  and  important 
Letter,  by  presenting  to  you  the  conjugation  of  these  two 
Verbs,  both  of  which  aie  irregular,  and  every  irregularity 
is  worthy  of  your  strict  attention. 


Present 
Time. 


Past 
Time. 


Future 
Time. 


Present 
Time. 


Singular. 
/-1st  Person. 
-  2(1  Person, 
(3d  Person. 


INFINITIVE  MODE. 

To  Have. 
INDICATIVE  MODE. 

.  Plural 
.     I  have,  We  have. 

.     Thou  hast,  You  have. 

He,  she,  or  it  has  They  have, 
or  hath],  We  had. 
You  had. 


/■ —  I  had, 
•<  —  Thou  hadst, 
( —  He,  she  or  it  had, 
^ —  I  shall,  or  will  have, 
^'  —  Thou  shalt,  or  wilt  have, 
( —  He,  she,  or  it  shall  or  will 
have], 


They  had. 

We  shall,  or  will  have. 
You  shall,  or  will  have. 
They  shall,  or  will  have. 


SUBJUNCTIVE  MODE, 

f  If  I  have,  or  may,  might,  could,  or  should  liave. 

I  If  thou  have,  or  may  "         "  "  have. 

',  If  he,  she,  or  it  have,  or  may  "  have. 

I  If  we  have,  or  may         "  "  have; 

If  you  have,  or  may        "  "  have. 

Lif  they  liave,  or  may      "  *'  have. 

IMPERATIVE  MODE. 
Let  me  have,  Let  us  have. 

Have  thou,  Have  you. 

Let  him,  her,  or  it  have,  Let  them  have. 


Of  Verbs. 


79 


PARTICIPLES. 

Active.  —Having. 
Passive. — Had. 

116.  Though  I  have  inserted  hath  in  the  third  person 
singular  of  the  present  of  the  indicative,  it  is  hardly  ever 
used.  It  is  out  of  date,  and  ought  to  be  wholly  laid 
aside. 

117.  The  Verb  to  be  is  still  more  in-egular,  but  a  little 
attention  to  its  irregidarities  will  prevent  all  errors  in  the 
use  of  it. 


Present 
Time. 


Past 
Time. 


Futiu-e 
Time. 


INFINITIVE  MODE. 

To  Be. 
INDICATIVE  MODE. 


Singular. 
/1st  Person. 
-.  2d  Person. 
(3d  Person. 


I  am, 

Thou  art, 

He,  she,  or  it  is, 


/- —  I  was, 
-  —  Thou  wast, 
( —  He,  she,  or  it  was, 
/- —  I  shall,  or  will  be, 
Thou  shalt,  or  wilt  be. 


Plural. 
We  are. 
You  are. 
They  are. 
We  were. 
You  were. 
They  were. 
We  shall,  or  will  be. 
You  shall,  or  will  be 


( —  He,  she,  or  it  shall,  or  will  be,  Tliey  shall,  or  will  be. 


SUBJUNCTIVE  MODE. 
'If  I  be,  or  may,  might,  would,  could,  or  should  be, 
If  tliou  be,  or  may   "  " 

Present    I  If  he,  she,  or  it  be,  or  may 
Ti™6-       I  If  we  be,  or  may         " 
If  you  be,  or  may        " 
.If  they  be,  or  may       " 

fif  I  were. 
If  thou  were. 
If  he,  she,  or  it  were. 
I  If  we  were. 
{  If  you  were. 
I  If  they  were. 


Past  Time. 


80  Etymology 

IMPERATIVE  MODE. 
Let  me  be.  Let  us  be. 

Be  tliou,  Be  you. 

Let  lum,  her,  or  it,  be,  Let  them  be. 

PARTICIPLES. 

Present.  — Being. 
Past. — Been. 

118.  In  the  Subjunctive  Mode  I  have  made  use  of 
the  conjunction  if  throughout  all  the  conjugations  of 
Verbs.  But  a  Verb  may  be  in  that  mode  without  an  if 
before  it.  The  if  is  only  one  of  the  marks  of  that  mode. 
A  Verb  is  always  in  that  mode  when  the  action  or  state  of 
being  expressed  by  the  Verb  is  expressed  conditionally, 
or  when  the  action  or  state  of  being  is,  in  some  way  or 
other,  dep&yident  on  some  other  action  or  state  of  being. 
But  of  this  I  shall  speak  more  at  large  when  I  come  to 
the  Syntax  of  Verbs. 

119.  There  remain  a  few  words  to  be  said  about  the 
signs,  the  defective  Verbs,  and  the  impersonal  Verbs.  The 
signs,  may,  might,  can,  could,  tvill,  would,  shall,  should, 
and  7nust,  have  all,  originally,  been  Verbs,  though  they 
are  now  become  defective  in  almost  all  their  parts,  and 
serve  only  as  signs  to  other  Verbs.  Will,  indeed,  is  part 
of  a  regular  Verb ;  as,  to  will,  they  ioilled,  they  are  imlling, 
they  will  be  willing.  The  word  would  is  certainly  the 
past  time  and  passive  participle  of  the  same  Verb ;  and, 
indeed,  it  is  used  as  a  principal  Verb  now,  in  certain  cases ; 
as,  "I  would  he  were  rich."  That  is  to  say,  I  desire,  or 
am  willing,  or,  it  is  my  icill,  that  he  should  be  rich.  But 
deep  inquuies  regarding  the  origiu  of  these  words  aie 
more  cuiious  than  useful.  A  mere  idea  of  the  natvu-e  of 
their  origin  is  enough.  The  Verb  ought  is  a  Verb  de- 
fective, in  most  of  its  parts.  It  certainly,  however,  is  no 
other  than  a  part  of  the  Verb  to  owe,  and  is  become  ought 
by  corruption.     For  instance ;  "  1  ought  to  wiite  to  you," 


Of  Verbs.  81 

means  that  "  I  owe  the  performance  of  the  act  of  writing 
to  you."  Ought  is  made  use  of  only  in  the  present  imiCy 
aaid  for  that  reason  a  great  deal  has  been  lost  to  our  lan- 
guage by  this  coiTuption.  As  to  the  Verbs  which  some 
grammaiians  have  called  impersonal,  there  are,  in  fact,  no 
such  things  in  the  English  language.  By  im2^ersonal 
Verb  is  meant  a  Verb  that  has  no  noun  ov  pronoun  for  its 
nominative  case ;  no  j^erson  or  thing  that  is  the  actor,  or 
receiver  of  an  action,  or  that  is  in  being.  Thus:  "it 
rams,"  is  by  some  called  an  impersonal  Verb ;  but  the 
pronoun  it  represents  the  person.  Look  again  at  Letter 
VI,  and  at  pai-agraphs  60  and  61.  You  will  there  find 
what  it  is  that  this  it,  in  such  cases,  represents. 

120.  Thus  I  have  concluded  my  Letter  on  the  Ety- 
mology of  Verbs,  which  is  by  far  the  most  important  part 
of  the  subject.  Great  as  have  been  my  endeavors  to 
make  the  matter  clear  to  you,  I  am  awai'e,  that,  after  the 
Jirst  reading  of  this  Letter,  your  mind  will  be  greatly 
confused.  You  will  have  had  a  glimpse  at  everything  in 
the  Letter,  but  will  have  seen  nothing  cleai-ly.  But,  my 
deal*  James,  lay  the  book  aside  for  a  day  or  twp;  then 
read  the  whole  Letter  again  and  again.  Read  it  eai'ly, 
while  your  mind  is  clear,  and  while  sluggards  are  snoring. 
Write  it  down.  Lay  it  aside  for  another  day  or  two. 
Copy  your  own  writing,  lliink  as  you  proceed ;  and,  at 
the  end  of  your  copying,  you  will  understand  clearly  all 
the  contents  of  the  Letter.  Do  not  attempt  to  study  the 
Letter  piece  by  piece.  Li  yoiu*  readings,  as  well  as  in 
your  copyings,  go  clean  throughout.  If  you  follow  these 
instructions,  the  remaining  part  of  your  task  will  be  very 
easy  and  pleasant. 

As  to  this  last  piece  of  advice,  1  caunot  agree  with  Cobbett, 
Reading  the  whole  letter  at  once  is  the  very  way  to  get  a  confused 
impression  of  the  whole  subject;  just  as  going  through  a  whole 
museum  at  once  leaves  a  confused  impressiou  of  everything  and  a 
distinct  impression  of  nothing.     Ko ;  go  through  one  roomful  of 


«2 


Etymology 


cunositics  at  one  visit;  master  the  whole  collection  step  by  step; 
and  when  you  have  got  it  pretty  clear  in  your  mind,  then  you  may 
go  over  it  all  at  one  run. 

To  complete  this,  the  most  important  part  of  etymology,  I  must 
give  you  a  full  view  of  a  passive  verb,  or  rather  of  a  verb  in  the 
passive  voice.  Just  devote  one  little  half-hour  to  it  in  the  early 
morning,  when  your  mind  is  fresh ;  and  you  will  see  its  nature 
clearly;  compare  it  with  the  same  verb  in  the  active  voice,  and 
you  will  get  a  fair  idea  of  what  a  verb  in  the  passive  voice  is. 
For,  to  make  the  matter  all  the  more  plain,  I  see  no  reason  why 
this  same  verb  to  work,  which  I  have  given  you  in  the  active  voice, 
should  not  be  given  in  the  passive,  too ;  for  we  often  say,  He  t» 
worked  to  death;  the  mine  was  well  worked;  the  problem  has  been 
worked  out,  and  so  on.  Besides — and  this  is  a  secret  which  every 
school-boy  does  not  know — there  must,  in  the  conjugation  of  every 
passive  verb,  be  displayed  a  complete  conjugation  of  the  verb  to  be; 
so  here  we  kill  two  birds  with  one  stone. 

Complete  Conjugation  of  the  Passive  Verb  To  be  worked  : 


INFINITIVE  MOOD. 


BIMFLE  TENSES. 

Present  tense. 
To  be  worked. 


COMPOUND  TEN8K8. 

Present  perfect  tense. 
To  have  been  worked. 


INDICATIVE  MOOD. 


Present  tense. 
I  am  worked, 
Thou  art  worked, 
He  is  " 

We  are  " 

You  are        " 
They  are       " 

Past  tense. 
I  was  worked, 
Thou  wast  worked, 
He  was  " 

We  were  " 

You  were         " 
They  were       " 

Simple  future  tense, 
I  shall  be  worked, 
Thou  wilt  be  worked, 
He  will  be  " 

We  shall  be 
You  will  be         " 
They  will  be       " 

Present  coii'litUmalform. 
I  should  be  worked. 
Thou  wouldst  be  worked, 
He  would  be  " 

We  should  be  " 

You  would  be  " 

They  would  be  " 


Present  perfect  tense. 
I  have  been  worked. 
Thou  hast  been  worked. 
Hhi  has  been  " 

We  have  been  ' ' 
You  have  been  " 
They  have  been      " 

Past  perfect  tense. 
I  had  been  worked. 
Thou  hadst  been  worked. 
He  had  been  " 

We  had  been  " 

You  had  been  " 

They  had  been  " 

Perfect  future  tense. 
I  shall  have  been  worked. 
Thou  wilt  have  been  worked. 
He  will  have  been  " 

We  suall  have  been  " 

You  will  have  been  " 

They  will  have  been        " 

Perfect  conditional  form. 
I  should  have  bepn  worked. 
Tbou  wouldst  have  been  worked. 
He  would  have  been  " 

We  should  have  been  " 

You  would  have  been  " 

They  would  have  been  " 


Of 

Adverbs. 

POTENTIAL  MOOD. 

Present  tente. 
I  may  be  worked, 
Thou  mayst  be  worked, 
He  may  be             " 
We  may  be              " 
You  may  be            " 
They  may  be          " 

Present  perfect  tente. 
I  may  have  Deen  worked. 
Thou  raayst  have  been  worked. 
Ho  may  have  been 
We  may  have  been              " 
You  may  have  b>?en            " 
They  may  have  been 

Pa«t  tense. 
I  mipht  be  worked. 
Thou  mijihtst  be  worked, 
HemigrhtbH              " 
We  might  be             " 
You  mi^ht  be           " 
They  might  be         " 

Past  perfect  tense. 
I  might  have  boen  worked. 
Thou  mightst  have  been  worked. 
He  mijiht  have  been               " 
We  might  have  been              " 
You  might  have  been             " 
They  might  have  been          " 

SUBJUNCTIVE  MOOD. 

Prestntteru*. 
If  I  be  worked, 
thou  be  worked, 
he  be 

we  be             " 
you  be            " 
they  be          " 

Present  pert ect  tense. 
If  I  have  been  worked, 
thou  have  been  worked, 
he  have  been            " 
wehivebeen          " 
you  have  been         " 
they  have  been       " 

Past  tense. 
If  I  were  worked, 
thou  were  worked, 
he  were          '* 
we  were 
you  were       " 
they  were 

Past  perfect  tense. 
If  I  had  been  worked, 
thou  had  been  " 
he  had  been       " 
we  had  been     " 
yuu  had  been     " 
they  had  been   " 

IMPERATIVE  MOOD. 

Be  worked. 

or,                      Be  thou  worked. 

83 


PARTICIPLES. 
lV««i<— Being  worked,  Pa«<— Having  been  worked. 


LETTER   IX. 


ETYMOLOGY    OF    ADVERBS. 

121.  In  Letter  III,  and  in  pai'agraphs  27  and  28,  you 
will  find  a  description  of  this  Part  of  Speech.  Read 
again  those  two  pai-agraphs,  in  order  to  refresh  your 
memory.  There  is  not  much  to  be  said  about  Adverbs 
imder  the  head  of  Etymology.  They  are  words  hable  to 
few  vaiiations.  Adverbs  are  very  numerous,  and  may  be 
divided  into  five  principal  classes :  that  is  to  say,  Adverbs 
of  time.,  of  place,  of  order.,  of  quality.,  and  of  manner. 


84  Etymology 

This  last  class,  which  is  the  most  numerous,  is  composed  of 
those  which  are  derived  immediately  from  adjectives,  and 
which  end  in  ly ;  as,  especially^  particularly,  thankfully. 

122.  These  Adverbs,  ending  in  /y,  are,  for  the  most 
part,  formed  by  simply  adding  ly  to  the  adjective;  as,  es- 
pecial becomes  especially ;  but  if  the  adjective  end  in  y, 
that  y  is  changed  into  i  in  forming  the  Adverb ;  as,  happy, 
happily ;  steady,  steadily.  If  the  adjective  end  in  le, 
the  e  is  dropped  in  forming  the  Adverb;  as,  possible, 
possibly. 

123.  Some  few  Adverbs  have  degrees  of  comparison; 
as,  often,  oftener,  oftenest ;  and  those  which  are  derived 
from  irregular  adjectives  are  m-egular  in  forming  their 
degrees  of  compai'ison ;  as,  xcell,  better,  best. 

124.  Some  Adverbs  are  simple  or  single ;  others  cotn- 
pound.  The  former  consist  of  one  word,  the  latter  of 
two  or  more  words;  as,  happily  /  at  present/  now-a-days  / 
which  last  means  at  the  days  that  noio  are.  Another  Ad- 
verb of  this  description  is,  by-and-by ;  which  is  used  to 
express,  in  a  short  time ;  and  literally  it  means  near  and 
near ;  because  by  itself,  as  an  Adverb,  means  near,  close, 
beside.  When  Adverbs  are  compound,  the  words  com- 
posing them  ought  to  be  connected  by  a  hyphen,  or 
hyphens,  as  in  the  above  examples  of  now-a-days  and 
by-and-by. 

I  must  here  explain  to  you  two  important  tilings,  of  which  Cob- 
bett  makes  no  mention :  the  phrase  and  the  clause.  In  the  sen- 
tence, "I  shall  return  immediately,''''  the  word  immediately  is 
simply  an  adverb  of  time,  modifying  the  verb  shall  return;  but 
when  I  change  the  adverb  into  several  words,  as,  "I  shall  return  in 
an  instant"  it  becomes  a  phrase,  an  adveriial  pJirase.  Plu-ases  are 
used  to  express  all  that  adverbs  are  used  to  express,  and  nearly  all 
adverbs  can  be  turned  into  adverbial  phrases.  The  adverb  now 
may  be  changed  into  at  this  moment  or  at  present ;  beautifully  may 
be  rendered  by  in  a  beautiful  manner ;  here  may  be  turned  into  at 
this  place;  in  a  quiet  way  may  he  rendered  hy  quietly ;  and  so  on. 
And  here  I  must  show  you  that  there  are  many  cases  where  w© 


Of  Adverbs.  85 

prefer  the  adverbial  phrase  to  tlie  adverb.  To  what  part  of  speech 
do  you  think  the  words  m'Ui/,  Mildly,  friendly,  belong  ?  They  look 
like  adverbs,  do  they  not?  But  they  are  not,  as  you  will  find  by 
trial:  a  silly  boy,  a  kindly  gentleman,  a  friendly  lady.  Shall  I 
then  say,  The  boy  speaks  sillily?  The  gentleman  acts  kindlily? 
The  lady  received  us  f riendlily  ?  These  expressions  are  not  abso- 
lutely incorrect;  they  are  better  than  with  the  adjective.  The  boy 
speaks  silly,  etc. ;  but  they  do  not  sound  agreeable ;  so  we  prefer 
the  adverbial  pnRASE :  The  boy  speaks  in  a  silly  manner  ;  the  gen- 
tleman acts  in  a  kindly  manner;  the  lady  received  us  in  a  friendly 
manner,  or  in  a  friendly  tcay.  Observe,  too,  that  you  ought  never 
to  put  a  preposition  before  an  adverb  of  place ;  as,  to  here,  from 
there.  You  must  use  a  pJircbse,  and  say,  to  this  place,  from  that 
city,  etc.,  always  naming  the  place  referred  to.  Never  s^y  from 
whence,  from  thence  ;  but  simply  whence,  thence. 

Now  for  the  clause.  The  difference  between  the  phrase  and  the 
clause  is  this :  the  clause  always  has  a  subject  and  predicate  (nom- 
inative and  verb),  the  phrase  never  has  either.  "I  shall  return 
when  I  please.''^  Here,  instead  of  the  phrase  in  an  instant,  we  have 
an  assertion,  with  subject  (I)  and  predicate  (please),  which  cannot 
be  changed  for  a  single  word.  This  is  called  an  adverbial  clause; 
adverbial  because  it  modifies  the  verb  of  the  first  clause ;  for  the 
sentence  now  contains  two  clauses,  and  is  changed  from  a  simple 
into  a  complex  sentence.  Every  sentence  must  have  at  least  one 
clause,  while  there  may  not  be  a  single  phrase  in  ten  consecutive 
sentences.  A  clause  may  be  not  only  adverbial,  but  objective, 
participial,  infinitive,  or  relative.  "He  asked  what  J  was  doing, '^ 
objective  clause;  "He  came  in  as  I  was  going  away,"  participial 
clause;  "  He  wants  to  see  what  icill  come  of  it,"  infinitive  clause; 
"The  boy  who  learns  English  is  my  son,"  relative  clause;  anc^ 
so  on.  Observe  the  following  three  examples,  and  you  will  see 
how  the  adverb  may  be  turned  into  an  adverbial  phrase,  and  the 
latter  into  an  adverbial  clause: 

Speak  distinctly. 

Speak  in  a  distinct  manner. 

Speak  so  that  you  may  be  understood. 
It  is  worth  noticing  that  some  adverbs  help  to  join  clauses  as  well 
as  to  express  time  or  place,  and  are  therefore  called  conjunctive  ad- 
verbs :  I  shall  return  when  he  returns.  I  will  toll  you  v^liere  we  are 
going.  Others,  again,  express  negation,  affirmation,  or  cause, 
and  are  called  adverbs  of  negation,  of  affirmation,  or  of  cause,  as, 
(1)  no,  not,  never;  (2)  yes,  yea,  truly,  certainly;  (3)  why,  w/iereforcy 


86  Etymology. 

therefore.  No,  coming  immediately  before  a  noun,  is,  of  course,  an 
adjective  ;  as,  No  person  under  25  years  of  age  can  become  a  mem- 
ber of  Congress.  Observe  that  all  adverbs  ending  in  ly  are  com- 
pared with  more  and  irKJSt,  or  less  and  least ;  as,  haudsomely,  more 
handsomely,  most  handsomely  ; — handsomely,  less  handsomely, 
least  handsomely.  Do  you  remember  the  names  of  these  three 
degrees?  An  adverb  modifies  a  verb,  an  adjective,  or  another  ad- 
verb. To  vrhat  part  of  speech,  then,  does  the  word  the  belong,  in 
such  phrases  as,  "the  more  the  merrier,"  "  the  longer  the  better"? 


LETTER    X. 

ETYMOLOGY   OF   PREPOSITIONS. 

125.  Letter  III,  iDaiagiai^hs  29  and  33,  has  taught  you 
of  what  description  of  words  Prep'^sitions  are.  The 
chief  use  of  them  is  to  express  the  different  relations  or 
connections  which  nouns  have  with  each  other,  or  in 
which  nouns  stand  with  regard  to  each  other ;  as,  John 
gives  money  <o  Peter ;  Peter  receives  money /rom  John. 
It  is  useless  to  attempt  to  go  into  curious  inquiries  as  to 
the  origin  of  Prepositions.  They  never  change  their 
endings;  they  are  always  written  in  the  same  manner. 
Their  use  is  the  main  thing  to  be  considered ;  and  that 
will  become  very  cleai*  to  you,  when  you  come  to  the 
Syntax. 

126.  There  are  two  abbreviations,  or  shortenings,  of 
Prepositions,  which  I  will  notice  here,  because  they  are 
in  constant  use,  and  may  excite  doubts  in  your  mind. 
These  are  a  and  o'  /  as,  I  am  a  hunting ;  he  is  a  coming ; 

at  is  one  o'clock.     The  a  thus  added  is  at,  without  doubt; 

.  as,  I  am  at  hunting ;  he  is  at  coming.  Generally  this  is 
a  vulgar  and  redundant  manner  of  speaking;  but  it  is  in 
use.  In  mercantile  accounts  you  wiJ  frequently  see  this 
a  made  use  of  in  a  very  odd  sort  of  way ;  as,  "  Six  bales 
marked  1  a  6."  The  merchant  means,  "Six  bales  mai'ked 
from  1  tj  6."  But  this  I  take  to  be  a  relic  of  the  Norman 
French,  which  was  once  the  law  and  mercantile  language 


Of  Prepositions.  87 

of  England ;  for,  in  French,  a  with  an  accent,  means  to  or 
at.  I  wonder  that  merchants,  who  are  generally  men  of 
sound  sense,  do  not  discontinue  the  use  of  this  mark  of 
aSfectation.  And,  I  beg  you,  my  dear  James,  to  bear  in 
mind,  that  the  only  use  of  words  is  t)  c  luse  our  me':t7ung 
to  be  clexrly  understood ;  and  that  the  best  words  are 
those  which  are  familiar  to  the  ears  of  the  greatest  num- 
ber of  persons.  The  o'  with  the  mark  of  elision  means 
of,  or  of  the,  or  on,  or  on  the  ;  as,  two  o'clock,  which  is  the 
same  as  to  say  two  of  the  clock,  or  two  according  to  the 
clock,  or  two  on  the  clock. 

127.  As  to  the  Prepositions  which  are  joined  to  verbs 
or  other  words;  as,  to  outlive,  to  undervalue,  to  be  over- 
done, it  would  be  to  waste  our  time  to  spend  it  in  any 
statements  about  them;  for  these  are  other  loords  than 
to  live,  to  value,  to  be  done.  If  we  were  to  go,  in  this 
way,  into  the  subject  of  the  composition  of  words,  where 
should  we  stop?  Thank/ «^,  thankless,  vdihout,  withm/ 
these  are  all  compound  m^ ox i\^,  but,  of  what  tise  to  us  to 
enter  on,  and  spend  our  time  in,  inquiries  of  mere  cario- 
sity? It  is  for  monks  and  for  Fellows  of  English  colleges, 
who  hve  by  the  sweat  of  other  people's  brows,  to  spend 
their  time  in  this  manner,  and  to  call  the  result  of  theu* 
studies  learning ;  for  you,  who  wid  have  to  earn  what 
you  eat  and  what  you  di'ink  and  what  you  wear,  it  is  to 
avoid  everything  that  tends  not  to  real  utiity. 

It  may,  however,  not  be  quite  useless  to  mention  the  names 
given  to  the  parts  of  derived  words.  Kind,  ua-kind,  kiad-ness. 
The  original  word  is  called  the  root;  the  syllable  placed  before  the 
root  is  called  the  prefix;  and  the  syllable  added  to  the  root  is 
called  the  suffix.  Although  any  word  having  a  prefix  or  a  sufBx 
may  be  called  a  compound  word,  we  generally  call  those  words 
compound  which  are  formed  by  uniting  two  or  more  whole  words ; 
svs,  workshop,  schoolmaster,  army-chest.  And  as  to  which  com- 
pound words  take  a  h}'phen,  and  which  do  not,  this  depends  a 
good  deal  upon  the  shape  of  the  first  and  the  last  letter  of  the  two 
words  united.    For  instance,  churchyard  needs  no  hyphen,  because 


88  Etymology 

the  two  parts  are  sufficiently  separated  by  the  ascending  h  and  the 
descending  y  ;  but  church-bell  or  clmrch-hymn  must  be  so  separated, 
because  the  parts  of  the  word  would  otherwise  not  be  sufficiently 
distinct. 

As  to  the  correct  iise  of  prepositions  generally,  there  is  no  guide 
equal  to  tlie  feeling  for  propriety  acquired  by  much  reading  and 
speaking,  and  by  frequent  hearing  of  good  speakers.  Well  do  I 
remember  that,  among  my  most  advanced  scholars  in  Germany, 
almost  the  only  mistake  they  finally  made  was  in  the  use  of  the 
prepositions,  showing  that  this  was  the  last  difficulty  to  be  mas- 
tered. It  was  sometimes  a  matter  so  peculiar,  so  delicate,  so  diffi- 
cult to  choose  the  right  preposition,  that  I  was  myself  obliged  to 
repeat  a  sentence  aloud  several  times  before  I  could  hit  on  the 
riglit  word. 

Do  not  forget  that  the  preposition  governs  the  objective  case — I 
send  for  him— nor  that  the  same  word  may  sometimes  belong  to 
another  part  of  speech :  I  send  for  him,  for  I  cannot  do  without 
him.  Notice  that  people  are  said  to  be  in  any  place,  but  that  they 
go  into  a  place.  We  are  in  the  garden,  we  are  going  into  the 
jQOUse.  In  the  Broadway  stages  there  stands,  over  the  fare-box, 
tills  sentence :  "  Put  the  exact  fare  in  the  box."  It  should  be  ««■&> 
the  box ;  for,  though  the  money  may  be  in  the  box,  it  is  put  into 
it. — Do  not  suppose  that  every  preposition  must  be  a  little  word ; 
for  concerning,  respecting,  regarding,  notwithstanding  are  also  prepo- 
sitions. Observe,  too,  that  nine  phrases  out  of  ten  begin  with  a 
preposition. 

In  regard  to  the  expressions,  a-hunting,  a-coming,  and  the  like, 
Cobbett  can  not  mean  that  these  are  vulgar  and  redundant,— 
which  is  what,  at  first,  I  thought  he  meant, — but  that  at  hunting, 
at  coming,  are  so.  The  other  expression  is  perfectly  legitimate, 
and  used  by  tl^e  best  authors.  You  may  say,  therefore,  that  some- 
thing or  anything  is  a-doing,  a-making,  a-building,  a-ripeniug, 
a-brewing,  and  so  on. 


Of  Conjunctions.  89 


LETTER    XI. 

ETYMOLOGY     OF     CONJUNCTIONS. 

128.  In  Letter  III,  pai-agraph  31,  you  have  had  a  de- 
scription of  this  sort  of  words,  and  also  some  account  of 
the  uses  of  them.  Some  of  them  are  called  copulative 
Conjunctions,  aud  others  disjunctive.  They  all  serve  to 
join  together  words,  or  parts  of  sentences ;  but  the  for- 
mer express  an  union  in  the  actions,  or  states  of  being, 
expressed  by  the  verb;  as,  you  (nid  I  talk.  The  latter  a 
disunion;  as,  you  talk,  but  I  act.  The  words  of  this 
Part  of  Speech  never  vary  in  theu'  endings.  They  are 
always  spelled  in  one  and  the  same  way.  In  themselves 
they  present  no  difficulty ;  but,  as  you  will  see  by-and-by, 
to  use  them  properly,  with  other  words,  in  the  forming 
of  sentences,  demands  a  due  portion  of  your  attention 
and  cai'e. 

You  see  Cobbett  says  "aa  union."     Can  you  tell  why  this  is 
wrong?     If  not,  look  at  Letter  IV,  paragraph  36  (note). 


LETTER     XII. 

c  a  u  t  i  o  n  a  k  y    k  k  m  a  r  k  s . 

My  dear  James  : 

129.  Before  we  enter  ou  Syntax,  let  me  give  you  a 
caution  or  two  with  regard  to  the  contents  of  the  forego- 
ing Letters. 

130.  There  are  some  words  which,  vmder  different  cir- 
cumstances belong  to  more  than  one  Part  of  Speech,  as, 
indeed,  you  have  seeu  in  the  Participles.  But  this  is  by 
no  means  confined  to  that  particulai'  description  of  words. 


•90  Cautionary  Remarks. 

I  act.  Here  act  is  a  verb ;  but  "  the  act  performed  by  me" 
shows  the  very  same  word  in  the  capacity  of  a  noun.  The 
message  was  sent  hy  him ;  he  stood  hy  at  the  time.  In 
the  fiist  of  these  examples  hy  is  a  preposition ;  in  the  last 
an  adverb.  Mind,  therefore,  that  it  is  the  sense  hi  which 
the  loord  is  used,  and  not  the  letters  of  ichich  it  is  com- 
posed,  that  determines  what  is  the  Pai-t  of  Speech  ta 
which  it  belongs. 

131.  Never  attempt  to  get  by  rote  any  part  of  your  in- 
structions. Whoever  falls  into  that  practice  soon  begins 
to  esteem  the  powers  of  memory  more  than  those  of  rea- 
son ;  and  the  former  are  despicable  indeed  when  com- 
pared with  the  latter.  When  the  fond  parents  of  an 
eighth  wonder  of  the  world  call  him  forth  into  the  middle 
of  the  parlor  to  repeat  to  their  visitors  some  speech  of  a 
play,  how  angry  would  they  be  if  any  one  were  to  tell 
them  that  their  son's  endowments  equalled  those  of  a 
parrot  or  a  bullfinch !  Yet  a  German  bird-teacher  would 
make  either  of  these  more  perfect  in  this  species  of 
oratory.  It  is  this  mode  of  teaching,  Avhich  is  practised 
in  the  gi'eat  schools,  that  assists  very  much  in  making 
dunces  of  lords  and  country  squii-es.  They  '■''  yet  their 
lesson  ;"  that  is  to  say  they  repeat  the  ivords  of  it ;  but, 
as  to  its  sense  and  meaniny,  they  seldom  have  any  under- 
standing. This  operation  is  sometimes,  for  what  reason 
I  know  not,  called  getting  a  thing  by  heart.  It  must,  I 
should  think,  mean  by  liearH  ;  that  is  to  say,  by  hear  it. 
That  a  person  may  get  and  retain  and  repeat  a  lesson  in 
this  way,  without  any  effort  of  the  mind,  is  very  cleai* 
from  the  fact,  of  which  we  have  daily  proof,  that  people 
sing  the  words  and  the  tune  of  a  song  with  perfect  cor- 
rectness, at  the  very  time  that  they  are  most  seriously 
thinking  and  debating  in  theu*  minds  about  matters  of 
great  importance  to  them. 

132.  I  have  cautioned  you  before  against  studying  the 
foregoing  icstructions  piecemeal;  that  is  to  say,  a  little 


Cautionary  Remarks.  91 

hit  at  a  time.  Read  a  letter  all  through  at  once ;  and, 
now  that  you  have  come  to  the  end  of  my  instructions  on 
Etymology,  read  all  the  Letters  through  at  once :  do  this 
repeatedly;  taking  care  to  proceed  slowly  and  cai'efully; 
and,  at  the  end  of  a  few  days,  all  the  matters  treated  of 
will  form  a  connected  whole  in  your  mind. 

133.  Before  you  proceed  to  the  Syntax,  try  yourself  a 
little,  thus:  Copy  a  short  sentence  from  any  book.  Then 
write  down  the  words,  one  by  one,  and  write  against  each 
what  Pai't  of  Speech  you  think  it  belongs  to.  Then  look 
for  each  word  in  the  dictionary,  where  you  will  find  the 
several  Pai-ts  of  Speech  denoted  by  little  letters  after  the 
word :  s.  is  for  substantive,  or  noun ;  ^>ro.  for  j^ronoun  y 
a.  for  article  ;  v.  a.  for  verb  active ;  v.  n.  for  verb  neuter ; 
adj.  for  adjective;  adv.  for  adverb;  />re.  for  preposition; 
con.  for  conjunction;  int.  for  interjection.  It  will  give 
you  great  pleasui  e  and  encouragement  when  you  find  that 
you  are  right.  If  you  be  sometimes  wrong,  this  will  only 
urge  you  to  renewed  exertion.  You  will  be  proud  to  see 
that,  without  any  one  at  your  elbow,  you  have  really 
acquired  something  which  you  can  never  lose.  You  will 
begin,  and  with  reason,  to  think  yourself  learned;  your 
sight,  though  the  objects  will  still  appear  a  good  deal 
confused,  will  dart  into  every  part  of  the  science ;  and 
you  will  pant  to  complete  what  you  will  be  convinced  you 
have  successfully  begun. 

This  is  Mr.  White's  much-ridiculed  and  thoroughly-despised 
parsing  exercise.  Of  course,  carried  on  as  it  is  at  the  public- 
schools,  with  little  or  no  real  understanding  of  the  matter,  and 
with  a  kind  of  rapid,  mechanical,  parrot-like  repetition  of  gram-  ; 
maticul  terms,  it  is  worse  than  useless.  But  I  am  convinced  . 
that,  properly  considered,  and  understandingly  carried  out,  this 
exercise  is  of  positive  value.  To  a  boy  or  girl  of  proper  age,  it 
may  be  made  indeed,  tolerably  interesting.  Let  us  look  at  a 
single  little  sentence.     "  Boys  love  swimming." 

Boyn  is  a  common  noun,  third  person,  plural  niunber,  masculine 
gender,  nominative  case. 


92  Syntax   Generally   Considered. 

Love  is  a  regular  transitive  verb,  active  voice,  third  person, 
plural  number,  present  tense,  indicative  mood. 

Swimming  is  a  common  (or  participial)  noun,  third  person,  sin- 
gular number,  objective  case. 

Now,  take  each  one  of  these  definitions,  and  ask  why?  and  if 
you  can  answer  properly,  then  the  exercise  has  become  of  real  and 
substantial  benefit  to  you.  Why  a  common  noun  ?  Because  it  is  a 
general  name,  &nd.  not  &  particular  one.  Why  iM-(?  person  ?  Be- 
cause it  is  spoken  of.  W\ij plural  number?  Because  it  means 
more  than  one.  l^h.j  masculine  gender  "i  Because  it  is  the  name 
of  males.  Why  nomi native  case?  Because  it  is  the  subject  of  the 
sentence;  and  so  on.  If  I  had  said,  "  Boys  love  to  swim,"  the  ob- 
ject, to  swim,  would  be  called  a  verbal  noun. 


LETTER   XIII. 

syxtax  generally   considered. 

My  dear  James: 

134.  In  Letter  II,  paragraph  9,  I  shortly  explained  to 
you  the  meaning  of  the  word  Syntax,  as  that  word  is  used 
in  the  teaching  of  grammar.    Read  that  paragraph  again. 

135.  We  aie,  then,  now  entering  upon  this  branch  of 
your  study;  and  it  is  my  object  to  teach  you  how  to  give 
all  the  words  you  make  use  of  their  proper  situation  when 
you  come  to  put  them  into  sentences.  Because,  though 
every  word  that  you  make  use  of  may  be  coiTectly  spelled ; 
that  is  to  say,  may  have  all  the  letters  in  it  that  it  ought 
to  have,  and  no  more  than  it  ought  to  have ;  and  though 
all  the  words  may,  at  the  same  time,  be  the  fit  words  to 
use  in  order  to  express  what  you  wdsh  to  express ;  yet, 
for  want  of  a  due  observance  of  the  principles  and  rules 
of  Syntax,  youi-  sentences  may  be  incoiTCct,  and,  in  some 
cases,  they  may  not  express  what  you  wish  them  to 
express. 

136.  I  shall,  however,  carry  my   instructions   a   Httle 


Sy7itax.  93 

fiu'ther  than  the  construction  of  independent  sentences. 
I  shall  make  some  remarks  upon  the  manner  of  putting 
sentences  together;  and  on  the  things  necessary  to  be 
understood,  in  order  to  enable  a  person  to  write  a  series 
of  sentences.  These  remai'ks  will  show  you  the  use  of 
figui'ative  language,  and  will,  I  hoj)e,  teach  you  how  to 
avoid  the  very  common  error  of  making  your  writing  con- 
fused and  unintelligible. 


LETTER    XIV. 


The  Points  and  Marks  made  use  of  in  Writing. 
My  deak  James: 

137.  There  are,  as  I  informed  you  in  paragragh  9,  Let- 
ter II,  Points  made  use  of  in  the  making,  or  writing, 
of  sentences ;  and,  therefore,  we  must  first  notice  these ; 
because,  as  you  will  soon  see,  the  sense,  or  meaning,  of 
the  words  is  very  much  dependent  upon  the  points  which 
are  used  along  with  the  words.  For  histance:  "  You  will 
he  rich  if  you  be  industrious,  lu  a  feiv  years.''''  Then 
again :  "  You  will  be  rich,  if  you  be  industrious  in  a  few 
years^  Here,  though  in  both  sentences  the  words  and 
also  the  order  of  the  words  are  precisely  the  same,  the 
meaning  of  one  of  the  sentences  is  very  different  from 
that  of  the  other.  The  first  sentence  means  that  you  will, 
in  a  few  years'  time,  be  rich,  if  you  be  industrious  now. 
The  second  sentence  means  that  you  will  be  rich,  some 
time  or  other,  if  you  be  industrious  in  a  few  years  from 
this  time.  And  all  this  great  difference  in  meaning  is,  as 
you  must  see,  produced  solely  by  the  difference  in  the 
situation  of  the  comma.  Put  another  comma  after  the 
last  word  industrious,  and  the  meaning  becomes  dubious. 


94  Syntax. 

A  memorable  proof  of  the  great  importance  of  attending 
to  Points  was  given  to  the  English  nation  in  the  year 
1817.  A  committee  of  the  House  of  Lords  made  a  report 
to  the  House,  respecting  certain  political  clubs.  A  secre- 
tary of  one  of  those  clubs  presented  a  petition  to  the 
House,  in  which  he  declared  positively,  and  offered  to 
prove  at  the  bar,  that  a  part  of  the  report  was  totally 
false.  At  first  then*  Lordships  blustered;  their  high 
blood  seemed  to  boil;  but,  at  last,  the  Chairman  of  the 
Committee  apologized  for  the  report  by  saying  that  there 
ought  to  have  been  a  full-point  where  there  was  only  a 
comma !  and  that  it  was  this  which  made  that  false  which 
would  otherwise  have  been,  and  which  was  intended  to  be, 
true! 

138.  These  Points  being,  then,  things  of  so  much  con- 
sequence in  the  forming  of  sentences,  it  is  necessary  that 
I  explain  to  you  the  use  of  them,  before  I  proceed  any 
farther.  There  are  fom*  of  them:  the  Fidl-point^  or 
Period;  the  Colon;  the  Semi-colon;  the  Comm,a. 

139.  The  Full-point  is  a  single  dot,  thus  [.],  and  it  is 
used  at  the  end  of  every  complete  sentence.  That  is  to 
Bay,  at  the  end  of  every  collection  of  words  which  make  a 
full  and  complete  meaning,  and  is  not  necessarily  con- 
nected with  other  collections  of  words.  But  a  sentence 
may  consist  of  several  members  or  divisions,  and  then  it 
is  called  a  compound  sentence.  When  it  has  no  divisions, 
it  is  calied  a  simple  sentence.  Thus:  "The  people  suffer 
great  misery."  This  is  a  simple  sentence;  but,  "The 
people  suffer  great  misery,  and  daily  perish  for  want,"  is 
a  compound  sentence;  that  is  to  say,  it  is  compounded, 
or  made  up,  of  two  simple  sentences. 

140.  The  Colon,  which  is  written  thus  [:],  is  next  to 
the  full-point  in  requiring  a  complete  sense  in  the  words. 
It  is,  indeed,  often  used  when  the  sense  is  complete,  but 
when  there  is  something  still  behind,  which  tends  to  make 
the  sense  fuller  or  cieaier. 


Syntax.  95 

141.  The  Semi-colon  is  written  thus  [;],  and  it  is  used 
to  set  off,  or  divide,  simple  sentences,  in  cases  when  the 
comma  is  not  quite  enough  to  keep  the  meaning  of  the 
simple  sentences  esufGciently  distinct. 

142.  The  Comma  is  written  thus  [,],  and  is  used  to 
maxk  the  shortest  pd,uses  in  reading,  and  the  smallest 
divisions  in  'ivritiiig.  It  has,  by  some  grammarians,  been 
given  as  a  rule  to  use  a  comma  to  set  off  every  part  of  a 
compound  sentence,  which  part  has  in  it  a  verb  not  in  the 
infinitive  mode ;  and,  certainly,  this  is,  in  general,  proper. 
But  it  is  not  always  proper;  and,  besides,  commas  are 
used,  in  numerous  cases,  to  set  off  pai'ts  which  have  no 
verbs  in  them ;  and  even  to  set  off  single  words  which  are 
not  verbs ;  and  of  this  the  very  sentence  which  I  am  now 
writing  gives  you  ample  proof.  The  comma  marks  the 
shortest  pause  that  we  make  in  speaking ;  and  it  is  evi- 
dent that,  in  maL,y  cases,  its  use  must  depend  upon  taste. 
It  is  sometimes  used  to  give  emphasis,  or  weight,  to  the 
word  after  which  it  is  put.  Observe,  now,  the  following 
two  sentences:  "I  was  very  well  and  cheerful  last  week; 
but,  am  rather  feebie  and  low-spirited  now."  "I  am  very 
willing  to  yie^d  to  yoiu-  kind  requests;  but,  I  will  set 
yoiu"  harsh  commands  at  defiance."  Commas  are  made 
use  of  when  phrases,  that  is  to  say,  jjortions  of  words, 
are  throwed  into  a  sentence,  and  which  are  not  absolutely 
necessaiy  to  assist  in  its  grammatical  construction.  For 
instance:  "There  were,  in  the  year  1817,  petitions  from  a 
million  and  a  ha.f  of  men,  who,  as  they  distinctly  alleyed^ 
were  suffering  the  greatest  possible  hai'dships."  The  two 
phrases,  in  italics,  may  be  left  out  in  the  reading,  and 
still  the  sentence  wixl  have  its  full  grammatical  con- 
struction. 

Here  Cobbett  shows  he  made  no  distinction  between  a  phrase 
and  a  clauric.  It  is  true  tliat  in  a  popular  sense  aay  number  of 
words  may  be  called  a  phrase  ;  as,  "  How  do  you  do  .-'  Good-bye." 
But  in  grammar  this  word  has  a  particular  sense,  and  these  last- 


96  Syntax. 

mentioned  expressions  do  not  agree  with  it.  "  In  the  year  1817"  is 
a  phrase,  and  "  as  they  distinctly  alleged  "  is  a  clause,  because  the 
former  has  neither  subject  nor  predicate  and  the  latter  has  both. 
I  must  say,  too,  that  at  the  present  day  no  corrector  for  the  press 
(proof-reader)  would  allow  those  commas  to  stand  after  those  buts. 
Further,  thrmoed  instead  of  thrown  is  not  yet  in  common  use ;  but 
I  am  inclined  to  think  it  will  soon  be,  just  like  sawed  instead  of 
sawn,  or  crowed  instead  of  cre^D. 

143.  Let  us  now  take  a  compound  sentence  or  two  con  - 
taining  all  the  four  points.  "  In  a  land  cf  liberty  it  is  ex- 
tremely dangerous  to  make  a  distinct  order  of  the  profes- 
sion of  arms.  In  absolute  monarchies  this  is  necessary 
for  the  safety  of  the  priace,  and  arises  from  the  maia 
principle  of  their  constitution,  which  is  that  of  governing 
by  fear;  but  in  free  states  the  profession  of  a  soldier, 
taken  singly  and  merely  as  a  profession,  is  justly  an  ob- 
ject of  jealousy.  In  these  states  no  man  should  take  up 
arms,  but  witl\  a  view  to  defend  his  country  and  its  laws 
he  puts  off  the  citizen  when  he  enters  the  camp :  but  it  is 
because  he  is  a  citizen,  and  would  continue  so,  that  he 
makes  himself  for  a  while  a  soldier.  The  laws  therefore 
and  constitution  of  these  kingdoms  know  no  such  state  as 
that  of  a  perpetual  standing  soldier,  bred  up  to  no  other 
profession  than  that  of  war;  and  it  was  not  till  the  reign 
of  Henry  VII.  that  the  kings  of  England  had  so  much  as 
a  guard  about  their  persons."  This  passage  is  taken  from 
Blackstone's  Commentaries,  Book  I.  Chap.  13.  Here  aie 
four  com|)lete  sentences.  The  first  is  a  simple  sentence. 
The  other  thi-ee  are  compound  sentences.  Each  of  these 
latter  has  its  members,  all  very  judiciously  set  off  by 
points.  The  word  so,  in  the  thu'd  sentence,  ought  to  be 
such,  or  the  words  a  citizen  ought  to  be  rejDeated.  But, 
with  this  trifling  excejDtion,  these  are  very  beautiful  sen- 
tences. Nothing  affected  or  confused  in  them :  all  is  sim- 
ple, clear,  and  harmonious. 

144.  You  will  now  see  that  it  is  quite  impossible  to 
give  any  precise  rules  for  the  use  of  these  several  points.. 


Syntax.  97 

Much  must  be  left  to  taste :  something  must  depend  upon 
the  weight  which  we  may  wish  to  give  to  particular  words, 
or  phrases;  and  something  on  the  seriousness,  or  the 
levity,  of  the  subject  on  which  we  ai'e  wiiting. 

145.  Besides  these  points,  however,  there  are  certain 
gi'ammatical  signs,  or  marks,  which  are  made  use  of  in 
the  writing  of  sentences :  the  mark  of  parenthesis,  the 
mark  of  interrogation,  the  mai'k  of  exclaynation,  the 
apostrophe,  otherwise  called  the  mark  of  elision,  and  the 
hyphen. 

146.  The  mark  of  Parenthesis  consists  of  two  curved 
strokes,  drawed  across  the  line  of  wiiting,  or  of  print.  Its 
use  is  to  enclose  a  phrase  throwed  in  hastily  to  assist  in 
elucidating  oiu'  subject,  or  to  add  force  to  our  assertions 
or  ai'guments.  But,  observe,  the  parenthesis  ought  to  be 
very  spai'ingly  used.  It  is  necessarily  an  interrupter;  it 
breaks  in  upon  the  regular  course  of  the  mind:  it  tends 
to  divert  the  attention  from  the  main  object  of  the  sen- 
tence. I  will  give  you,  fi'om  IVIi".  Tull,  Chap.  XIII,  an 
instance  of  the  omission  of  the  pai'enthesis,  and  also  of 
the  proper  employment  of  it.  "  Palladiijs  thought  also, 
with  others  of  the  ancients,  that  Heaven  was  to  be  fright- 
ened with  red  cloth,  with  the  feathers  or  the  heart  of  an 
owl,  and  a  multitude  of  such  ridiculous  scarecroxos,  from 
spoiHng  the  fruits  of  the  fields  and  gardens.  The  ancients 
having  no  rational  principles,  or  theory  of  agriculture^ 
placed  theu*  chief  confidence  in  magical  charms  and  en- 
chantments, which  he,  who  has  the  patience  or  cvuiosity 
to  read,  may  find,  tmder  the  title  aforementioned,  in  Cato, 
in  Vakeo  {and  eoen  Columella  is  as  fulsome  as  any  of 
them),  all  written  in  very  fine  language ;  which  is  most  of 
the  erudition  that  can  be  acquii-ed  as  to  field  husbandry, 
from  the  Greek  and  Latin  writers,  whether  in  verse  or 
prose."  For  want  of  the  mai'k  of  parenthesis  in  the  first 
of  these  sentences,  we  almost  think,  at  the  close  of  it, 
that  the  author  is  speaking  of  the  crows,  and  not  of 

5 


98  Syntax. 

Heaven,  being  frightened  from  spoiling  the  fruits  of  the 
fields  and  the  gardens.  Bat  with  regard  to  the  use  of 
the  parenthesis,  I  shall  speak,  perhaps,  more  fully  by- 
and-by :  for  the  employment  of  it  is  a  matter  of  some  im- 
portance. 

It  is,  perhaps,  worth  mentioning  that  this  word  parenthesis,  like 
all  the  words  ending  in  is,  changes  the  i  into  e  ia  the  plural :  paren- 
theses, crises,  theses.  So  that  we  must  speak  of  a  word  or  sen- 
tence being  enclosed  in  parentheses,  not  parenthesis. 

147.  The  mark  of  Interrogation,  which  is  written  thus 
[?],  is  used  when  a  question  is  asked ;  as,  "  Who  has  my 
lyenf''  "What  tnan  is  that?^"*  In  these  and  numerous 
other  cases,  the  mark  is  not  necessary  to  oui*  clear'y  com- 
prehending the  meaning  of  the  writer.  Bat  this  is  not 
always  the  case.  "What  does  he  say?  Put  the  hoi'se 
into  the  stable."  Again:  ""What  does  he  say?  Put  the 
horse  into  the  stable?"  In  speaking,  this  great  difference 
in  the  meaning,  in  this  instance,  would  be  fully  expressed 
by  the  voice  and  manner  of  the  si^eaker ;  but,  in  writing, 
the  mark  of  interrogation  is,  you  see,  absolutely  necessary 
in  order  to  accomjjlish  the  pui-pose. 

148.  The  mai'k  of  Exclamation,  or  Admiration,  is  writ- 
ten thus  [!],  and,  as  its  name  denotes,  is  used  to  distin- 
guish words  or  sentences  that  are  exclamatory,  from  such 
as  are  not :  "  What  do  you  say  !  What  do  you  say  ?"'  The 
difference  in  the  sense  is  very  obvious  here.  Again :  "He 
is  going  away  to-night!  He  is  going  away  to-7ught.'''' 
The  last  simply  states  the  fact;  bat  the  first,  besides 
stating  the  fact,  expresses  surjyrise  at  it. 

119.  The  Apostrophe,  or  mark  of  Elision,  is  a  comma 
placed  above  the  hne,  thus  ['].  Elision  means  a  striking 
out;  and  this  mark  is  used  for  that  purpose;  as,  don''t 
for  do  not;  tho'  for  though/  lov\l  for  loved.  I  have 
mentioned  this  mark,  because  it  is  used  properly  enough 
in  poetry  ;  but,  I  beg  you  never  to  use  it  in  prose  in  one 
single  instance  during  your  whole  hfe.     It  ought  to  bo 


J^oints   and  Marks.  99 

called  the  tu>ix\  not  of  elision,  but  of  laziness  and  vul- 
garity. It  is  necessai'y  as  the  mai'k  of  the  possessive  case 
of  novms,  as  you  have  seen  in  Lettei'  V,  paragraph  47. 
That  is  its  use,  and  any  other  employraent  of  it  is  an  abuse. 

150.  The  Hyphen  or  Conjoiner  is  a  little  line  used  to 
connect  words,  or  parts  of  words ;  as  in  sea-fish.,  water-rat. 
For  here  are  two  distinct  words,  though  they,  in  these  in- 
stances, make  but  one.  Sometimes  the  hyphen  is  used  to 
coiuiect  many  words  together :  "  The  never-to-be-forgotten 
craelty  of  the  borough-tyrants."  When,  in  writing,  or  in 
printing,  the  line  ends  with  pai't  of  a  word,  a  hyphen  is 
placed  after  that  part,  in  order  to  show  that  that  part  is 
to  be  joined,  in  the  reading,  with  that  which  begins  the 
next  line. 

151.  These  are  all  the  grammatical  marks ;  but  there 
are  others  used  in  writing  for  the  pm-pose  of  saving  time 
and  words.  The  mark  of  quotation  or  of  citing.  This 
mark  consists  of  two  commas  placed  thus :  "  There  were 
many  men."  It  is  used  to  enclose  words  taken  from  other 
writings  or  from  other  persons'  discoui'se ;  and,  indeed,  it 
is  fi-equently  used  to  enclose  certain  sentences,  or  words, 
of  the  writer,  when  he  wishes  to  mark  them  as  wholly 
distinct  from  the  general  com'se  of  any  statement  that  be 
is  making,  or  of  any  instruction  that  he  is  giving.  I  have, 
for  instance,  in  the  writing  of  these  Letters  to  you,  set 
off  many  of  my  examples  by  marks  of  quotation.  In 
short,  its  use  is  to  notify  to  the  reader  that  such  and  such 
words,  or  such  and  such  sentences,  are  not  to  be  looked 
upon  as  forming  part  of  the  regular  course  of  those 
thoughts  which  are  at  the  present  time  coming  from  the 
mind  of  the  writer. 

152.  This  mark  fill  is  found  in  the  Bible.  It  stands 
for  paragraph.  This  [§]  is  sometimes  used  instead  of 
the  word  section.  As  to  stars  [*]  and  the  other  marks 
which  are  used  for  the  purpose  of  leading  the  eye  of  the 
reader  to  notes,  in  the  same  page,  or  at  the  end  of  the 


100  Syntax. 

book,  they  are  perfectly  arbitrary.  You  may  use  for 
this  purpose  any  marks  that  you  please.  But  let  me 
observe  to  you  here,  that  notes  ought  seldom  to  be  re- 
sorted to.  Like  parentheses,  they  are  interrupters^  and 
much  more  troublesome  interrupters,  because  they  gener- 
ally tell  a  much  longer  story.  The  employing  of  them 
arises,  iu  almost  all  cases,  from  confusion  in  the  mind  of 
the  wi'iter.  He  finds  the  matter  too  much  for  him.  He 
has  not  the  talent  to  work  it  all  up  into  one  lucid  whole ; 
and,  therefore,  he  puts  part  of  it  into  notes.  Notes  ai'e 
seldom  read.  If  the  text,  that  is  to  say,  the  main  part 
of  a  writing,  be  of  a  nature  to  engage  our  earnest  atten- 
tion, we  have  not  time  to  stop  to  read  the  notes  :  and  if 
om*  attention  be  not  earnestly  engaged  by  the  text,  we 
soon  lay  down  the  volume,  and  of  com'se  read  neither 
notes  nor  text. 

153.  As  a  mark  of  abbreviation,  the  full  point  is  used ; 
as,  "  ]Mi\  ]\Ii-s."  But  I  know  of  hardly  any  other  words 
that  ought  to  be  abbreviated ;  and  if  these  were  not  it 
would  be  all  the  better.  People  may  indulge  themselves 
in  this  practice,  until  at  last  they  come  to  write  the 
greater  part  of  their  words  in  single  letters.  The  fre- 
quent use  of  abbreviation  is  always  a  mark  of  slovenliness 
and  of  vulgarity.  I  have  known  lords  abbreviate  almost 
the  half  of  their  words :  it  was,  very  likely,  because  they 
did  not  know  how  to  spell  them  to  the  end.  Instead  of 
the  word  and,  you  often  see  people  put  &.  For  what 
reason  I  should  like  to  know.  But  to  this  &  is  sometimes 
added  a  c  /  thus,  &c.  And  is  in  Latm  et,  and  c  is  the 
first  letter  of  the  Latin  word  ccetera,  which  means  the 
like,  or  so  on.  Therefore  this  cbc.  means  and  the  like,  or 
and  so  07i.  This  abbreviation  of  a  foreign  word  is  a  most 
convenient  thing  for  such  writers  as  have  too  much  indo- 
lence or  too  little  sense  to  say  fully  and  clearly  what  they 
ought  to  say.  If  you  mean  to  say  and  the  like,  or  and  so 
on,  why  not  say  it  ?    This  abbreviation  is  very  frequently 


Points  and  Marks.  101 

made  use  of  without  the  writer  having  any  idea  of  its 
import.  A  wiiter  on  grammar  says,  "When  these 
words  are  joined  to  if,  sitice,  etc.,  they  ai'e  adverbs." 
But  where  is  the  like  of  if,  or  of  since  f  The  best  way 
to  guard  yourself  against  the  committing  of  similar  errors 
is  never  to  use  this  abbreviation. 

154.  The  use  of  capitals  and  italics  I  will  notice  in 
this  place.  In  the  books  printed  before  the  middle  of 
the  last  centm-y,  a  capital  letter  was  used  as  the  first 
letter  of  every  noun.  Capitals  ai-e  now  used  more  spar- 
ingly. We  use  them  at  the  beginning  of  every  para- 
graph, let  the  word  be  what  it  may ;  at  the  beginning  of 
every  sentence  which  follows  a  full-point ;  at  the  begin- 
ning of  all  proper  names  /  at  the  beginning  of  all  adjec- 
tives growing  out  of  the  names  of  countries,  or  nations  ; 
as,  the  E)igHsh  language ;  the  French  fashion ;  the 
American  government.  We  use  capitals,  besides,  at  the 
beginning  of  any  word,  when  we  think  the  doing  of  it 
likely  to  assist  in  elucidating  our  meaning,  but  in  general 
we  use  them  as  above  stated.  The  use  of  italic  charac- 
ters in  print  is  to  point  out,  as  worthy  of  particular  atten- 
tion, the  words  distinguished  by  those  chai'acters.  la 
writing  with  a  pen,  a  stroke  is  drawn  imder  such  words 
as  we  wish  to  be  considered  to  be  in  italics.  If  we  wish 
words  to  be  put  in  sjlill  capitals,  we  diaw  two  strokes 
under  them ;  if  in  FULL  CAPITALS,  we  di-aw  three 
strokes  under  them. 

155.  The  last  thing  I  shall  mention,  under  this  head, 
is  the  caret  [a],  which  is  used  to  poiut  upwards  to  a  pai't 
which  has  been  omitted,  and  which  is  inserted  between 
the  line,  where  the  caret  is  placed,  and  the  line  above  it. 
Things  should  be  called  by  theu-  right  names,  and  this 
should  be  called  the  hhcnder-rnark.  I  would  have  you, 
my  dear  James,  scorn  the  use  of  this  thing.  Think 
before  you  write ;  let  it  be  your  custom  to  write  correctly 
and  in  a  plain  hand.     Be  as  careful  that  neatness,  gram- 


102  Syntax. 

mar,  and  sense  prevail,  when  you  write  to  a  blacksmitli 
about  shoeing  a  horse,  as  when  you  write  on  the  most 
important  subjects,  and  when  you  expect  what  you  wiite 
to  be  read  by  persons  whose  good  opinion  you  are  most 
anxious  to  obtain  or  secure.  Habit  is  powerful  in  all  cases ; 
but  its  power  in  this  case  is  truly  wonderful.  "When  you 
write,  bear  constantly  in  mind  that  some  one  is  to  read 
and  to  understand  what  you  wiite.  This  will  make  your 
handwriting,  and  also  your  meaning,  plain.  Never  think 
of  mending  what  you  write.  Let  it  go.  No  patcliing ; 
no  after  pointing.  As  your  pen  moves,  bear  constantly 
in  mind  that  it  is  making  strokes  which  are  to  remain 
for  ever.  Fai",  I  hope,  from  my  dear  James  v^'ill  be  the 
ridiculous,  the  contemptible  a^ectation,  of  wril^ing  in  a 
slovenly  or  illegible  hand  ;  or  that  of  signing  his  name 
otherwise  than  in  plain  letters. 

156.  In  concluding  this  Letter,  let  me  caution  you 
against  the  use  of  what,  by  some,  is  called  the  dash. 
The  dash  is  a  stroke  along  the  line  ;  thus,  "  I  am  rich — 
I  was  poor — I  shall  be  poor  again."  This  is  wild  work 
indeed!  "Who  is  to  know  what  is  intended  by  the  use  of 
these  dashes  ?  Those  who  have  thought  proper,  like  IVIr. 
Liadley  Murray,  to  place  the  dash  amongst  the  grairi" 
matical  points,  ought  to  give  us  some  rule  relative  to  its 
dilierent  longitudinal  dimensions  in  different  cases.  The 
inch,  the  three-quarter-iyich,  the  half-inch  the  quarter- 
inch  ;  these  would  be  something  determinate  ;  but,  "  the 
dash,''  without  measure,  must  be  a  most  perilous  thing 
for  a  yotmg  grammarian  to  handle.  In  short,  "  the  dash  " 
is  a  cover  for  ignorance  as  to  the  use  of  points,  and  it 
can  answer  no  other  pui-pose. — A  dash  is  very  often  put 
in  crowded  print,  in  order  to  save  the  room  that  would 
be  lost  by  the  breaks  of  distinct  paragraphs.  This  is 
another  matter.  Here  the  dash  comes  after  a  full-point. 
It  is  the  using  of  it  in  the  body  of  a  sentence  against 
which  I  caution  you. 


JPoints  and  Marks.  103 

As  to  the  "  no  patching;  no  after-pointing,"  this  is  all  very  well 
for  those  who  arc  endowed  with  uncommon  talent  for  composi- 
tion ;  but  everybody  cannot  be  a  Shakespeare  or  a  Cobbett.  It  is 
well  known  that  Pope  corrected  and  recorrected,  polished  and  re- 
polished  his  lines  "many  a  time  and  oft,"  and  I  have  heard  that 
Schiller  and  other  good  writers  have  done  the  same  thing ; 
Macaulay,  for  instance.  You  will  have  written  many  a  page 
before  you  acquire  such  surcness  cf  hand  and  perfect  power  of 
expression  as  never  to  need  to  change  a  word  or  add  a  point  on 
looking  over  what  you  have  written.  In  this  very  paragraph  I  had 
.  fii'st  written  "everybody  cannot  be  Shakespearcs  or  Cobbetts;" 
but,  on  looking  it  over,  I  saw  that  everybody,  the  subject,  is  singular, 
and  that  therefore  the  attribute  ought  to  agree  with  it.  The  eye 
often  detects  errors  committed  by  the  ear  or  the  tongue ;  and  the 
ear  often  detects  errors  committed  by  the  hand  or  the  pen. 

Cobbett's  advice  concerning  the  dash  is,  I  think,  by  no  means  to 
be  followed.  His  contempt  for  this  mark  is  one  of  his  crotchets, 
of  which  he  had  quite  a  l&,rge  stock.  The  dash  is  now  universally 
used  by  good  writers,  and  is,  in  its  proper  place,  conducive  to 
clearness;  it  is,  in  fact,  quite  as  good  a  point  as  any  other. 
There  are  some  persons — especially  half-educated  young  board- 
ing-school misses — who  clap  in  a  dash  for  almost  every  pause; 
but  this  is  no  reason  why  it  should  not  be  used  in  its  proper 
place,  which  is  either  immediately  before  some  expression  tend- 
ing to  complete  the  thought,  or  to  enclose  some  explanatory 
clause  thrown  in  like  a  parenthesis.  The  first  case  may  be  illus- 
trated by  the  dash  on  page  10, immediately  before  the  words  "I 
mean  dictation,"  and  the  second  case  by  the  above  expression 
concerning  half-educated  young  misses.  To  be  sure,  there  are 
cases  in  which  another  point  may,  perhaps,  be  used  with  equal 
propriety ;  but  this  mark  is  now  generally  recognized  as  a  proper 
mark  in  punctuation,  and  you  may  use  it  whenever  you  think 
proper. 

The  very  best  way  of  learning  punctuation  is,  as  I  have  else- 
where said,  by  writing  to  dictation.  By  the  frequent  writing' 
down  of  otlier  people's  points,  one  gets  a  good  general  knowledge 
of  the  whole  subject,  and  then  one  gradually  forms  a  style  of  one'a 
own.  For  it  is  well  known  that  in  the  English  language  punctua- 
tion is, to  a  great  extent,  a  matter  of  taste ;  and  Cobbett  himself, 
as  you  must  have  seen  by  this  time,  is  quite  peculiar  in  hi^  taste 
in  this  matter.  lie  uses  far  more  points  than  most  other  writers, 
especially  commas,  and  he  capitalizes  far  more  words  than  most 


104  Syntax. 

others  writers.  This  he  does  for  the  sake  of  emphasis,  or  of 
prominence ;  as,  for  instance,  in  the  names  of  the  parts  of  speech 
throughout  this  whole  grammar.  He  overdoes  this  matter  I  think, 
and  he  uses  too  many  italics ;  for  in  most  sentences  the  proper 
emphasis  must  be  left  to  the  reader. 

I  notice  that  the  tendency  in  our  modern  newspapers  is  to  drop 
as  many  points  as  possible.  Whether  this  is  done  to  save  space, 
time,  and  labor,  or  whether  it  is  done  for  the  sake  of  improve- 
ment, I  do  not  know ;  but  I  do  know  that  the  punctuating  of  our 
New  York  editor  of  to-day  presents  a  remarkable  contrast  to  that 
of  Cobbett ;  for  you  may  see  any  day  in  the  leading  columns  of 
the  Herald,  the  Tribune,  or  the  Times,  sentences  of  seven  or ' 
eight  lines,  with  all  manner  of  phrases  and  clauses,  without  a 
single  point  of  any  description,  except  a  period  at  the  end.  I 
suppose  they  will  leave  that  out  too,  by-and-by.  I  once  heard  of 
£  painter  who  put  a  period  between  every  word  of  the  sign  which 
/je  was  painting,  but  put  no  point  at  the  end.  Oa  being  reproached 
with  this,  he  exclaimed :  "  Why,  every  fool  knows  enough  to  stop 
when  he  comes  to  the  end!"  I  suppose  our  New  York  editor 
would  excuse  his  omission  of  points  on  the  same  principle,  that 
every  one  should  know  enough  to  stop  where  he  ought  to  stop. 
Cobbett  committed,  I  think,  the  opposite  error;  he  seems  to  have 
attempted  to  put  a  point  after  every  word,  or  nearly  every  word, 
where  a  pause  occurs ;  which  is  something  that  ought  not  to  be 
done,  and  indeed  never  is  nor  can  be  done.  Those  pauses  occurring 
where  there  are  no  points  are  rhetorical  pauses,  which  the  feeling 
or  instinct  of  every  good  reader  leads  him  to  make.  We  often 
pause,  for  instance,  for  the  sake  of  emphasis;  as  after  points, 
feeling  and  instinct  in  the  preceding  sentence. 

The  matter  of  simple,  compound,  and  complex  sentences,  which 
Cobbett  merely  touches,  is  very  important  to  those  who  intend  to 
pass  an  examination  in  grammar ;  for  a  knowledge  of  it  is  neces- 
sary in  Analysis,  and  all  those  who  pretend  to  have  a  "  teaching" 
knowledge  of  grammar  must  know  how  to  analyze.  I  will  there- 
fore try  to  give  a  little  fuller  explanation  of  it.  "  I  study."  This 
is  a  simple  sentence,  because  it  consists  of  but  one  simple  proposi- 
tion or  assertion,  having  but  one  subject  and  one  predicate.  "I 
study  and  Charles  plays."  Here  there  are  two  distinct  propositions, 
or  two  distiiict  clauses ;  hence  the  sentence  is  compound.  (Mark 
that  word  distinct.)  "When  I  study,  Charles  plays."  Here  there 
are  also  two  clauses,  but  not  distinct;  they  are  dependent,  or 
rather  one  depends  on  the  other;   hencp  the  sentence  is  called 


Points  and  Marks.  105 

complex.  The  clause  that  makes  complete  sense  (Charles  plays), 
is  the  chief  clause,  and  the  other  is  the  dependent  one.  You  per- 
ceive that  the  dependent  clause  simply  shows  when  Charles  plays ; 
tliercfore  the  main  thing  is  the  playing  of  Charles,  and  the  other 
simply  shows  the  time  of  his  playing.  "When  there  is  but  one 
proposition  or  statement,  the  sentence  is  simple;  when  there  are 
two  or  more  distinct  or  separate  propositions,  tlie  sentence  is  com- 
pound ;  but  when  there  are  two  or  more  propositions,  one  depend- 
ing on  the  other,  the  sentence  is  complex.  "  Every  morning  at 
five  o'clock  we  walk  into  the  forest  beyond  the  river."  Here  is 
but  one  simple  statement,  we  walk,  and  the  rest  consists  of  modi- 
fying phrases.  We  walk.  When?  Every  morning.  At  what 
part  of  the  morning?  At  five  o'clock.  Where?  Into  the  forest. 
Where  is  the  forest  ?    Beyond  the  river. 

Here  is  a  good,  though  somewhat  mechanical  rule,  for  deter- 
mining the  nature  of  a  sentence :  Any  sentence  that  you  may  cut 
into  two  sentences  by  placing  a  period  after  any  word  in  it,  is 
compound;  any  sentence,  consisting  of  two  or  more  clauses, 
which  you  can  not  thus  cut  into  two  sentences,  is  complex.  A 
sentence  consisting  of  but  one  proposition,  having  but  one  subject 
or  predicate,  is  simple.  Of  Cobbett's  three  sentences,  at  the  begin- 
ning of  this  paragraph  156,  the  first  is  complex,  the  second  com- 
pound, the  third  simple. 

And  now  I  see  that  I  have  to  explain  something  else  that  is 
necessary  to  a  knowledge  of  Analysis, —  I  mean  the  classification 
of  sentences  into  declarative,  interrogative,  exclamatory  and  im- 
perative. ' '  I  study "  is  called  a  simple  declarative  sentence ; 
declarative,  because  it  declares  or  affirms  something.  Nine  out  of 
ten  of  all  the  sentences  we  utter  are  declarative.  "  Do  I  study?" 
is  a  simple  interrogative  sentence ;  interrogative,  because  it  asks  a 
question.  An  interrogation  may  sometimes  be  merely  a  forcible 
way  of  declaring  something ;  as,  Should  anj'  man  be  deprived  of 
his  liberty  because  he  is  black  ?  But  this  is  a  figure,  as  you  will 
see  by-and-by.  "How  I  love  to  study!"  is  a  simple  exclamatory 
sentence;  exclamatory,  because  it  contains  an  exclamation. 
"Study,  and  get  on  in  the  world!"  is  a  compound  imperative  sen- 
tence; imperative,  because  it  contains  a  command  or  an  entreaty. 
Thus,  we  find  that  a  sentence  that  declares  or  aflirms  anything  is 
declarative;  that  one  that  asks  a  question  is  interrogative;  that 
one  that  contains  an  exclamation  is  exclamatory;  and  that  one 
that  contains  a  command  or  an  entreaty  is  imperative.  Let  me 
give  you  three  more  examples,  covering  the  whole  ground : 

5* 


106  Sy7itax, 

John  Brown  was  hanged.     (Simple  declarative  sentrice.) 
Was  John  Brown  hanged?    (Simple  interrogative  sentence.) 
What  a  spectacle  for  men  and  angels !    John  Brown  b^naed  and 

Jefferson  Davis  pardoned !  (Compound  exclamatory  sentence. 'i 
Hang  John  Brown,  and  pardon  Jefferson  Davis.     (Coffi\«-?^ji^ 

imperative  sentence.) 


LETTER  XV. 

syntax,  as  relating  to  articles. 

My  dear  James  : 

157.  Before  you  proceed  to  my  instructions  relative  tc 
the  employing  of  Ai'ticles,  you  will  do  well  to  read  again 
all  the  paragraphs  in  Letter  IV.  Our  Articles  are  so 
few  in  number,  and  they  are  subject  to  so  little  variation 
in  their  orthography,  that  very  few  eiTors  can  arise  in  the 
use  of  them.  But,  still,  errors  may  arise ;  and  it  will 
be  necessary  to  guard  you  against  them. 

158.  You  will  not  fall  into  very  gross  eiTors  in  the  use 
of  the  Ai'ticles.  You  will  not  say,  as  in  the  erroneous 
passage  cited  by  Doctor  Lowth,  "  And  I  persecuted 
this  way  imto  the  death,"  meaning  death  generally  ;  but 
you  may  commit  errors  less  glaring.  "  The  Chancellor 
informed  the  Queen  of  it,  and  she  immediately  sent  for 
the  Secretary  and  Treasurer."  Now,  it  is  not  certain 
here,  whether  the  Secretary  and  Treasurer  be  not  one 
and  the  same  person  ;  which  uncertainty  would  have  been 
avoided  by  a  repetition  of  the  Article :  "  the  Secretary 
and  the  Treasurer:"  and  you  will  bear  in  mind  that,  in 
every  sentence,  the  very  first  thing  to  be  attended  to  is 
clearness  as  to  meaning. 

159.  Nouns  which  express  the  whole  of  a  species  do 
not,  in  general,  take  the  definite  Article  ;  as,  "  Grass  is 
good  for  horses,  and  wheat  for  men."    Yet,  in  speaking  of 


As  Relating  to  Articles.  lOT 

the  appearance  of  tlae  face  of  the  country,  we  say,  *'  The 
grass  looks  well ;  the  wheat  is  blighted."  The  reason  of 
this  is  that  we  are,  in  this  last  case,  limiting  our  meaning 
to  the  grass  and  the  wheat  which  are  on  the  ground  at  this 
time.  "Howdo  Ar^ps  sell?  T/bps  ai-e  dear ;  but  f/te  hops 
look  promising."  In  this  respect  there  is  a  passage  in 
Mr.  Tull  which  is  faulty.  "Neither  could  weeds  be  of  any 
prejudice  to  corn.''''  It  should  be  '■Hhe  corn ;"  for  ha  does 
not  mean  corn  universally,  but  the  standing  corn,  and  the 
corn  amongst  which  weeds  grow;  and,  therefore,  the 
definite  Article  is  requii-ed. 

IGO.  "Ten  shillings  the  bushel,"  and  like  phrases,  are 
perfectly  correct.  They  mean,  "ten  shillings  hy  the 
bushel,  or  for  the  bushel."  Instead  of  this  mode  of  ex- 
pression we  sometimes  use,  "ten  shillings  a  bushel:'' 
that  is  to  say,  ten  shillings /br  a  bushel,  or  a  bushel  at  a 
time.  Either  of  these  modes  of  expression  is  far  prefer- 
able to  per  bushel ;  for  the  per  is  not  English,  and  is,  to 
the  greater  part  of  the  people,  a  mystical  sort  of  word. 

161.  The  indefinite  Article  a,  or  an^  is  used  with  the 
words  day,  month,  yeai',  and  others;  as,  once  a  day; 
twice  a  month ;  a  thousand  pounds  a  year.  It  means  in 
a  day,  in  a  month,  in  or  for  a  year ;  and  though  per 
annum  means  the  same  as  this  last,  the  English  phi-ase  is, 
in  all  respects,  the  best.  The  same  may  be  said  of  per 
cent.f  that  ia  per  centum,  or,  in  plain  English, ybr  the  hun- 
dred, or  a  hundred:  by  ten  per  centum  we  mean  ten  for 
the  hundred,  or  ten  for  a  hundred ;  and  why  can  we 
not,  then,  say,  in  plain  English,  what  we  mean? 

162.  "When  there  are  several  nouns  following  the  indef- 
inite Article,  care  ought  to  be  taken  that  it  accord  with 
them.  "^1  dog,  cat,  owl,  and  spaiTow."  Oto^  requires  a?i  / 
and,  therefore,  the  Article  must  be  repeated  in  this 
phi-ase ;  as,  a  dog,  a  cat,  an  owl,  and  a  spaiTow. 

1G3.  Nouns,  signifying  fixed  and  settled  collections  of 
individuals,  as  thousand,  hundred,  dozen,  score,  take  tlie 


\ 


108  Syntax, 

indefinite  Article,  though  they  axe  of  plural  meaning.  It 
is  a  certain  mass,  or  number,  or  multitude,  called  a  score  ; 
and  so  on ;  and  the  Article  agrees  with  these  understood 
•words,  which  are  in  the  singular  number. 

In  a  recent  announcement  of  a  new  novel  by  Robert  Buchanan, 
the  publishers  quote  this  one  line  concerning  it  from  the  London 
Spectator:  "The  work  of  a  genius  and  a  poet," — which  is  in  it- 
self a  suflQcient  comment  on  the  discriminating  taste  of  the  pub- 
lisher and  the  culture  of  the  critic.  But  I  suppose  a  man  may  be 
a  good  publisher  or  a  good  critic,  and  yet  not  know  how  to  write 
or  to  select  good  English. 

You  must  say  either  "the  first  and  the  second  class,"  or  "the 
first  and  second  classes ;"  not  "the  first  and  second  class,"  which 
would  mean  one  class  that  is  both  first  and  second.  Take  one  or  two 
similar  examples:  "  I  have  read  the  first  and  the  second  chapter, 
or  the  first  and  second  chapters ;  strike  out  the  first  and  the  second 
line,  or  the  first  and  second  lines."  You  may  say,  "the  north  and 
south  line,"  because  this  is  one  line  that  runs  north  and  south ;  but 
you  cannot  say  "the  north  and  west  line."  It  will  not  do  to  say 
"the  two  first  classes,"  because  there  cannot  be  any  such  thing  as 
Uyo  first  classes;  but  "  the  first  two  classes,"  which  means  simply 
the  two  classes  that  come  first  in  order.  So  with  other  similar  ex- 
pressions ;  as,  the  first  two  pages,  the  first  two  days,  &c.  You 
must  say,  "He  is  a  better  speaker  than  writer,"  not  "than  a 
writer."  "He  is  a  statesman  and  historian,"  not  "a  statesman 
and  an  historian."  "  Wanted — A  clerk  and  copyist."  How  often 
such  an  expression  is  used  to  mean  two  persons,  whereas  it  really 
means  one !  "There  lives  in  this  town  a  philosopher  and  a  poet." 
The  predicate  shows  that  one  person  is  meant,  while  the  subject 
indicates  two.  Mr.  White  quotes  the  following  announcement 
from  a  street-car :  "Passengers  are  requested  not  to  hold  conversa- 
tion with  either  conductor  or  driver;"  and  then  says :  "Now  this 
implies  that  there  are  two  conductors  and  two  drivers,  and  that 
the  passengers  are  asked  not  to  talk,  or,  in  elegant  phrase,  '  hold 
conversation,'  with  either  of  them.  The  simple  introduction  of  t?ie 
rectifies  the  phrase :  '  not  to  hold  conversation  with  either  the  con- 
ductor or  the  driver.' " 

I  saw  the  other  day  in  Pearl  Street,  New  York,  a  place  with 
this  sign:  "Hatters,  Tailors,  and  Factory  Stoves."  This  really 
means  that  the  owner  of  the  place  has  hatters  and  tailors  to  sell,  as 
well  as  factory  stoves.     It  might  pass  with  the  sign  of  the  pos- 


As  Helating  to  N'ouns.  109 

sessive:  "Hatters',  Tailors',  and  Factory  Stoves;"  but  this,  too, 
is  bad,  because  hatters  and  tailors  cannot  be  placed  in  the  same 
category  v;i\\\  a  factory.  It  should  be  "  Stoves  for  Hatters,  Tailors, 
and  Manufacturers,"  or  "  Hatters',  Tailors',  and  Manufacturers' 
S loves."  But  this  would  probably  be  too  long  for  the  stove-maker; 
so  he  preferred  writing  nonsense.  This  trj-iug  to  make  everything 
sliort  is  the  root  of  these  errors.  Here  is  a  man  in  Beekman  Street 
who  calls  his  Eating-House  a  "  Commercial  Lunch! "  Wliat  kind 
of  a  compound  may  a  commerdal  lunch  be?  Is  it  not  a  lunch 
made  of  various  articles  of  commerce :  beeswax,  potatoes,  turpen- 
tine, pig-iron,  and  leather?  Of  course  he  means  a  Lunch  for 
Commercial  People,  or  Lunch  for  Business  Men,  or  still  better, 
Business  Men's  Lunch ;  but  this,  no  doubt,  was  too  long  for  him. 


LETTER  XVI. 

syntax,  as  eelating  to  nouns. 

]\It  dear  James 

164.  Read  again  Letter  V,  the  subject  of  whicli  is  the 
Etymology  of  Noims.  Nouns  are  governed,  as  it  is  called, 
by  verbs  and  prepositions;  that  is  to  say,  these  latter 
sorts  of  words  cause  nouns  to  be  in  such  or  such  a  case  / 
and  there  must  be  a  concord,  or  an  agreement,  between 
tlie  Nouns  and  tlie  other  words,  which,  along  with  the 
Nouns,  compose  a  sentence. 

1G5.  But  these  matters  will  be  best  explaiued  when  I 
come  to  the  Syntax  of  Verbs,  for,  until  we  take  the  verb 
into  account,  we  cannot  go  far  in  giving  rules  for  the 
forming  of  sentences.  Under  the  present  head,  therefore, 
I  shall  content  myself  with  doing  little  more  than  to  give 
some  farther  account  of  the  manner  of  using  the  ^^osses- 
slve  case  of  Nouns ;  that  being  the  only  case  to  denote 
which  our  Nouns  vary  their  endings. 

166.  The  possessive  case  was  pretty  fully  spoken  of  by 
me  in  the  Letter  just  referred  to;  but  there  aie  certain 


110  Syntax, 

other  observations  to  make  with  regard  to  the  using  of  it 
in  sentences.  When  the  Noun  which  is  in  the  possessive 
case  is  expressed  by  a  circumlocution,  that  is  to  say  by 
many  words  in  heu  of  one,  the  sign  of  the  possessive  case 
is  joined  to  the  last  word;  as,  '^John,  the  old  farmer's, 
wife."  '■'■Oliver,  the  spy's,  evidence."  It  is  however  much 
better  to  say,  "The  wife  of  John,  the  old  farmer."  The 
"evidence  of  Oliver,  the  spy." 

167.  When  two  or  more  Nouns  in  the  possessive  case 
follow  each  other,  and  are  jouied  by  a  conjunctive  con- 
junction, the  sign  of  the  possessive  case  is,  when  the 
thing  possessed  is  the  same,  put  to  the  last  noun  only ; 
as,  "Peter,  Joseph,  and  Richard's  estate."  In  this  ex- 
ample, the  tbing  possessed  being  one  and  the  same  thing, 
the  sign  app^?e3  equally  to  each  of  the  three  possessive 
Nouns.  But  "Peter's,  Joseph's,  and  Richard's  estate," 
imphes  that  each  has  an  estate ;  or,  at  least,  it  will  admit 
of  that  meaning  being  given  to  it,  while  the  former  phrase 
will  not. 

168.  Sometimes  tho  sign  of  the  possessive  case  is  left 
out,  and  a  hyphen  is  use(?  in  its  stead ;  as,  "  Edwards,  the 
government-spy.''''  That  is  to  say,  "  the  government's 
spy ;"  or,  "  the  spy  of  the  government."  These  two  words, 
joined  in  this  manner,  are  called  a  compound  Noun ;  and 
to  this  compounding  of  Noun?  oui-  language  is  very 
prone.  We  say  "■  chamber- floor,  horse-shoe,  dog-collar  /'' 
that  is  to  say,  '■'■  chamber' s  floor,  horse's  shoe,  dog's  collar." 

169.  This  is  an  advantage  peculiar  to  oirr  language.  It 
enables  us  to  say  much  in  few  words,  which  always  gives 
strength  to  language ;  and,  after  clearness,  strength  is  the 
most  valuable  quality  that  writing  or  speaking  can  possess. 
"The  Yorkshkemen  flew  to  arms."  If  we  could  not  com- 
pound our  words,  we  would  have  to  say,  "  The  men  of  the 
shire  of  York  flew  to  arms."  When  you  come  to  learn 
French,  you  will  soon  see  how  much  the  Enghsh  lau' 
guage  is  better  than  the  French  in  this  respect. 


As  Helating  to  Nouns.  Ill 

170.  You  must  take  cai'e,  when  you  use  tlio  posdessive 
case,  not  to  use  aftex*  it  words  which  create  a  confusion  in 
meaning.  Hume  has  this  sentence:  '•  They  flew  to  arms 
and  attacked  Northumberland's  house,  whom  they  put  to 
death."  We  know  what  is  meant,  because  whom  can 
1  elate  to  persons  only ;  but  if  it  had  been  an  attack  on 
Northumberland's  vien,  the  meaning  would  have  been 
that  the  men  loere  pict  to  death.  However,  the  sentence, 
as  it  stands,  is  sufficiently  incorrect.  It  should  have  been : 
"  They  flew  to  ai-ms,  and  attacked  the  house  of  Northum- 
berland, whom  they  put  to  death." 

171.  A  passage  from  Doctor  Hugh  Blair,  the  author  of 
Lectures  on  Rhetoric,  will  give  you  another  instance  of 
error  in  the  use  of  the  possessive  case.  I  take  it  from 
the  24th  Lecture:  "In  compai'ing  Demosthenes  and 
Cicero,  most  of  the  French  critics  are  disposed  to  give 
the  preference  to  the  latter.  P.  Rapin,  the  Jesuit,  in  the 
parallels  which  he  has  di'awn  between  some  of  the  most 
eminent  Greek  and  Roman  writers,  uniformly  decides  in 
favor  of  the  Roman.  For  the  preference  which  he  gives 
to  Cicero,  he  assigns  and  lays  stress  on  one  reason,  of  a 
pretty  extraordinary  nature,  viz.,  that  Demosthenes  could 
not  possibly  have  so  clear  an  insight  as  Cicero  into  the 
manners  and  passions  of  men.  Why  ?  because  he  had  not 
the  advantage  of  perusing  Aristotle  s  I'reatise  on  Rheto- 
ric^ wherein,  says  our  critic,  he  has  fully  laid  open  that 
mystery  ;  and  to  support  this  weighty  ai'gument,  he  en- 
ters into  a  conti'oversy  with  A.  Gellius,  in  order  to  prove 
that  Aristotle's  Rhetoric  was  not  published  till  after  De- 
mosthenes had  spoken,  at  least,  his  most  considerable 
orations."  It  is  sui-prising  that  the  Doctor  should  have 
put  such  a  passage  as  this  upon  paper,  and  more  siu'pris- 
ing  that  he  should  leave  it  in  this  state  after  having 
perused  it  with  that  care  which  is  usually  employed  in 
examining  writings  that  are  to  be  put  into  print,  and 
especially  writings  in  which  every  word  is  expected  to  be 


112  Syntax, 

used  in  a  proper  manner.  In  Bacon,  in  Tull,  in  Black- 
stone,  in  Hume,  in  Swift,  in  Bolingbroke :  in  all  writers, 
however  able,  we  find  errors.  Yet,  though  many  of  their 
sentences  will  not  stand  the  test  of  strict  gi-ammatical 
criticism,  the  sense  generally  is  clear  to  our  minds ;  and 
we  read  on.  But,  in  this  passage  of  Dr.  Blair,  all  is 
confusion :  the  mind  is  puzzled :  we  at  last  hardly  know 
whom  or  what  the  writer  is  talking  about,  and  we  fahly 
come  to  a  stand. 

172.  In  speaking  of  the  many  faults  in  this  passage,  I 
shall  be  obliged  to  make  here  observations  which  would 
come  under  the  head  of  pronouns,  verbs,  adverbs,  and 
prepositions.  The  first  two  of  the  three  sentences  are  in 
themselves  rather  obscui'e,  and  are  well  enough  calculated 
for  ushering  in  the  complete  confusion  that  follows.  The 
he,  which  comes  immediately  after  the  word  because,  may 
relate  to  Demosthenes ;  but  to  what  Noun  does  the  second 
he  relate?  It  would,  when  we  first  look  at  it,  seem  to 
relate  to  the  same  Noun  as  the  first  he  relates  to ;  for  the 
Doctor  cannot  call  Aristotle  s  T'reatise  on  Rhetoric  a  he. 
No :  in  speaking  of  this  the  Doctor  says  "  wherein  /"  that 
is  to  say,  in  which.  He  means,  I  dare  say,  that  the  he 
should  stand  for  Aristotle;  but  it  does  not  stand  foi 
Aristotle.  This  Noun  is  not  a  nominative  in  the  sentence ; 
and  it  cannot  have  the  pronoun  relating  to  it  as  such. 
This  he  may  relate  to  Cicero,  who  may  be  supposed  to 
have  laid  open  a  mystery  in  the  perusing  of  the  treatise , 
and  the  words  which  follow  the  he  would  seem  to  give 
coimtenance  to  this  supposition;  for  lohat  mystery  is 
meant  by  the  words  ""that  mystery f  Is  it  the  mystery 
of  rhetoric,  or  the  mystery  of  the  manners  and  passions 
of  men  ?  This  is  not  all,  however ;  for  the  Doctor,  as  if 
bewitched  by  the  love  of  confusion,  must  tack  on  another 
long  member  to  the  sentence,  and  bring  forward  another 
he  to  stand  for  P.  Rapin,  whom  and  whose  argument  we 
have,   amidst   the   general   confusion,  wholly  forgotten. 


As  Relating  to  Nouns.  113 

There  is  an  error  also  in  the  use  of  the  active  participle 
perusing.  "  Demosthenes  could  not  have  so  complete  an 
insight  as  Cicero,  because  he  had  not  the  advantage  of 
perusing.  That  is  to  say,  the  advantage  of  being  en- 
gaged in  perusing.  But  this  is  not  what  is  meant.  The 
Doctor  means  that  he  had  not  had  the  advantage  of 
perusing/  or,  rather,  that  he  had  not  the  advantage  of 
having  perused.  In  other  words,  that  Demosthenes  could 
not  have,  or  possess,  a  certain  kind  of  knowledge  at  the 
time  when  he  made  his  orations,  because  at  that  time,  he 
had  not,  or  did  not  possess,  the  advantage  of  having 
perused,  or  ha,\ing  ^/i7iished  to  peruse,  the  treatise  of  Ai'is- 
totle.  Towai'ds  the  close  of  the  last  sentence  the  adverb 
"  at  least "  is  put  in  a  wrong  jilace.  The  Doctor  means, 
doubtless,  that  the  adverb  should  apply  to  considerable, 
and  not  to  spoken/  but,  from  its  beuig  improperly  placed, 
it  applies  to  the  latter,  and  not  to  the  former.  He  means 
to  say  that  Demosthenes  had  spoken  the  most  consider* 
able,  at  least,  of  his  orations ;  but  as  the  words  now  stand, 
they  mean  that  he  had  done  the  speaking  part  to  them,  if 
he  had  done  nothing  more.  There  is  an  eiTor  in  the  use 
of  the  word  "  insight,''^  followed,  as  it  is,  by  "  into.''''  We 
may  have  a  look,  or  sight,  into  a  house,  but  not  an  insight. 
This  would  be  to  take  an  inside  vieio  of  an  inside. 

173.  "We  have  here  a  pretty  good  proof  that  a  knowl- 
edge of  the  Greek  and  Latin  is  not  sufficient  to  prevent 
men  from  writing  bad  Enghsh.  Here  is  a  p>^^f^'^^^^ 
scholar,  a  teacher  of  Rhetoric,  discussing  the  comparative 
merits  of  Greek  and  Latia  writers,  and  disputing  with  a 
French  critic;  here  he  is  writing  English  in  a  manner 
more  incorrectly  than  you  will,  I  hope,  be  liable  to  write 
it  at  the  end  of  youi'  reading  of  this  little  book.  Lest  it 
should  be  supposed  that  I  have  taken  great  pains  to  himt 
out  this  erroneous  passage  of  Doctor  Blah',  I  will  inform 
you  that  I  have  hardly  looked  into  his  book.  Your 
brothers,  in  reading  it  through,  marked  a  great  number 


114  Syntax, 

of  erroneous  passages,  from  amongst  which  I  have  selected 
the  passage  just  cited.  "With  what  propriety,  then,  are 
the  Greek  and  Latin  languages  called  the  "  learned  lan- 
guages?" 

We  take  the  form  's  from  the  Germans,  and  hence  it  is  called 
the  Saxon  possessive ;  we  take  the  form  of  the  from  the  French, 
and  hence  it  is  called  the  Norman  possessive.  You  will  notice 
that  the  Saxon  possessive  is  used,  generally,  in  speaking  of  limng 
things,  and  the  other  in  speaking  of  things  without  life:  "the 
man's  hat,  the  horse's  tail,  the  cow's  horns ;  the  top  of  the  house, 
the  lid  of  the  kettle,  the  color  of  the  apple;"  but  this  is  by  no 
means  always  the  case,  for  we  can  speak  of  the  mountain's  top&ndi 
of  the  roar  of  the  lion.  Sometimes  we  are  obliged  to  use  the  Nor- 
man possessive  to  avoid  a  misconstruction,  as  in  the  case  of  "the 
house  of  Northumberland,"  above  quoted. 

There  is  another  peculiar  use  of  the  possessive  case,  which  Cob- 
bett  has  not  mentioned.  "He  spoke  of  John's  (his)  going  to  col- 
lege. There  is  no  doubt  of  the  bilPs  passing  the  House."  "We  often 
see  the  objective  used  in  such  cases,  instead  of  the  possessive; 
but  the  latter  is  correct.  Just  as  we  say  "a  friend  of  mine,  of 
thine,  of  his,  of  hers,  of  yours,  of  theirs,"  so  we  say  "a  soldier  of 
the  king's,  a  horse  of  my  neighbor's,  a  book  of  George's."  So 
Cobbett  ought  to  have  said  above,  "this  erroneous  passage  of 
Doctor  Blair's." 

You  notice  that  the  only  case-change  an  English  noun  can  un- 
dergo is  the  addition  of  's  in  the  possessive.  In  both  English  and 
French  the  nominative  and  objective  cases  of  nouns  are  invariable. 
Not  so  in  German.  The  following  sentence  will  show  you  at  a 
glance  the  difference  between  our  language  and  the  German  in  this 
respect : 

Don.  obj.  nom.  obj. 

The  boi/  loves  the  traveler.     The  traveler  loves  t7ie  hoy. 
Der  Knabe  liebt  den  Beisenden.     Der  Reisende  liebt  den  Knahen. 

Here  is  a  curious  passage  on  this  subject  from  Mr.  White's 
"Everyday  English" — a  passage  which,  to  prevent  a  confusion  of 
apostrophes,  I  give  in  one  paragraph,  with  none  but  Mr.  White's 
points,  except  the  dash  at  the  beginning  and  at  the  end : 

— The  Board  of  Civil  Service  .  examiners  at  Washington  gave,  as 
a  test  of  the  knowledge  of  the  use  of  the  apostrophe  as  a  sign  of 
the  possessive  case,  the  following  sentence:  "The  Commissioner 
of  Custom's  decisions  are  correct,"  requiring  tlie  apostrophe  to  be 


As  Relating  to  J^ronouns.  115 

placed  after  "  Customs."  A  dispute  having  arisen  upon  the  point, 
and  it  being  contended  that  the  proper  form  was  "The  Commis, 
sioner's  (of  Customs)  decisions  are  correct,"  an  officer  of  the 
Treasury  Department  submitted  the  question  to  me  for  an 
opinion. — 

And  Mr.  White  declares  that  the  decision  of  the  Civil  Service 
Board  is  correct.  Now  I  am  positive  that  in  this  case,  both  Mr. 
White  and  the  Board  of  Examiners  are  wrong.  It  is  when  a  word 
or  title  is  in  the  possessive  case  plukal  that  we  put  merely  an 
apostrophe  after  the  s;  as,  the  Examiners'  duties;  the  Commission- 
ers' affairs;  but  the  teran  "Commissioner  of  Customs"  is  not  plural, 
any  more  than  "Secretary  of  the  Treasury"  is  plural.  We  say 
"The  Secretary  of  the  Treasury's  report;"  and  if  the  Saxon  posses- 
sive is  to  be  used,  grammar  demands  that  we  say  ' '  The  Commis- 
sioner of  Customs's  decisions;"  for  the  sign  of  the  possessive  is  for 
the  wJwle  expression,  and  not  simply  for  customs.  An  apostrophe 
alone  may  be  placed  after  Customs,  because  it  will  sound  I)etter,  but 
not  because  it  is  grammatical. 

But  why  use  this  form  at  all  ?  Has  it  not  been  from  a  desire  to 
avoid  just  such  awkward  expressions  that  the  Norman  possessive 
has  come  into  use?  Does  it  not  sound  much  better  to  say  "The 
decisions  of  the  Commissioner  of  Customs"  than  "The  Commis- 
sioner of  Customs's  decisions?"— By  the  bye,  is  it  not  somewhat 
remarkable,  not  to  say  absurd,  that  the  Board  of  Examiners  should 
give  applicants  for  inferior  offices  questions  such  as  they  tihem- 
selves  are  in  dispute  about,  and  concerning  which  even  critics  in 
language  are  at  variance? 


LETTER    XVII. 

syntax,  as  relatrng  to  pronottk8. 

My  deab  James  : 

174.  You  will  now  read  again  Letter  VI.  It  will  bring 
you  back  to  the  subject  of  pronouns.  You  will  bear  in 
mind  that  personal  Pronouns  stand  for,  or  in  the  place 
of,  nouns ;  and  that  the  greatest  care  ought  always  to  be 
taken  in  using  them,  because,  being  small  words,  and  in 


116  Syntax, 

frequent  use,  the  proper  weight  of   them  is  very  often 
unattended  to. 

175.  You  have  seen  in  the  passage  from  Doctor  Blair, 
quoted  in  the  foregoing  Letter,  what  confusion  arises 
from  the  want  of  taking  care  that  the  Pronoun  relate 
clearly  to  its  nominative  case,  and  that  it  be  not  left  to 
be  understood  to  relate  to  anything  else.  Little  words, 
of  great  and  sweeping  influence,  ought  to  be  used  with 
the  greatest  care;  because  errors  in  the  using  of  them 
make  such  gi'eat  errors  in  point  of  meaning.  In  order  to 
impress,  at  the  outset,  these  precepts  on  yotu*  mind,  I 
•will  give  you  an  instance  of  this  kind  of  error  from 
Addison  ;  and,  what  is  well  calculated  to  heighten  the  in- 
terest you  ought  to  feel  upon  the  occasion,  is,  that  the  sen- 
tence which  contains  the  error  is,  by  Doctor  Blair,  held 
forth  to  students  of  languages,  in  the  University  of  Edin- 
burgh, as  a  perfect  model  of  correcti.tiess  and  of  elegance. 
The  sentence  is  from  Addison's  Spectator,  Number  411. 
"There  are,  indeed,  but  very  few  who  know  how  to  be 
idle  and  innocent,  or  have  a  relish  of  any  pleasui-es  that 
are  not  criminal;  every  diversion  they  take  is  at  the  ex- 
pense of  some  one  vu'tue  or  other,  and  their  very  first 
step  out  of  business  is  into  vice  or  folly."  Dr.  Blair  says: 
"Nothing  can  be  more  elegant,  or  more  finely  tiu*ned, 
than  this  sentence.  It  is  neat,  clear,  and  musical.  We 
could  hardly  alter  one  word,  or  displace  one  member, 
without  spoiling  it.  Few  sentences  are  to  be  found  more 
finished,  or  more  happy."  See  Blair's  20th  Lecture  on 
Rhetoric. 

176.  Now,  then,  my  dear  little  James,  let  us  see  whether 
we  plain  English  scholars  have  not  a  httle  more  judgment 
than  this  professor  in  a  learned  University,  who  could 
not,  you  will  observe,  be  a  Doctor,  until  he  had  preached 
a  sermon  in  the  Latin  language.  What  does  the  pronoun 
they  mean  in  this  sentence  of  ]VIr.  Addison?  What  noim 
does  it  relate  to,-  or  stand  for?    What  noun  is  the  noini- 


^ia  delating  to  Pronouns.  117 

native  of  the  sentence'?  The  nominative  of  the  sentence 
ia  the  word  few,  meaning  fern  persons.  Very  well,  then, 
the  Pronoun  t/iei/  relates  to  this  nominative;  and  tho 
meaning  of  the  sentence  is  this :  "  That  but  few  persons 
know  how  to  be  idle  and  innocent;  thut  fe >o  j^ersons  havo 
a  reHsh  of  any  pleasures  that  ai*e  not  criminal ;  that  every 
diversion  these  few  persons  take  is  at  the  expense  of  some 
one  vii'tue  or  other,  and  that  the  very  first  step  o/*  these 
few  persons  out  of  business  is  into  vice  or  folly."  S"» 
that  the  sentence  says  precisely  the  contrary  of  what  tho 
author  meant ;  or,  rather,  the  whole  is  perfect  nonsense. 
All  this  aiises  from  the  misuse  of  the  Pronoun  they.  If, 
instead  of  this  word,  the  author  had  pat  people  in  gen- 
eral, or  most  people,  or  tnost  men,  or  any  word  or  words 
of  the  same  meaning,  all  would  have  been  right. 

177.  I  will  take  another  instance  of  the  consequence  of 
being  cai'eless  in  the  use  of  personal  Pronouns.  It  is 
jErom  Judge  Blackstone,  Book  II,  Chapter  6.  "For  the 
custom  of  the  manor  has,  in  both  cases,  so  far  superseded 
the  will  of  the  lord,  that,  provided  the  services  be  per- 
formed, or  stipulated  for  by  fealty,  he  cannot,  in  the  first 
instance,  refuse  to  admit  the  heir  of  his  tenant  upon  his 
death;  nor,  m  the  second,  can  he  remove  his  present 
tenant  so  long  as  he  Uves."  Here  are  lord,  heir,  and 
tenant,  all  confounded.  We  may  guess  at  the  Judge's 
meaning ;  but  we  cannot  say  that  we  knoto  what  it  is ;  we 
cannot  say  that  we  are  certain  lohose  life,  or  %ohose  death, 
he  is  speaking  of. 

178.  Never  write  a  personal  Pronoun,  without  duly 
considering  rohat  noun  it  will,  upon  a  reading  of  the 
sentence,  be  found  to  relate  to.  There  must  be  a  noun, 
expressed  or  vmderstood,  to  which  the  Pronoun  clearly 
relates,  or  you  will  not  wiite  sense.  "The  land-holder 
has  been  represented  as  a  monster  which  must  be  hunted 
down,  and  the  fund-holder  as  a  still  greater  evil,  and 
both   have   been   described   as  rapacious  creatures,  who 


118  Syntax. 

take  from  the  people  fifteen  j:)ence  out  of  every  quai'tern 
loaf.  They  have  been  told  that  Parliamentary  Reform  is 
no  more  than  a  half  measure,  changing  only  one  set  of 
thieves  for  another ;  and  that  they  must  go  to  the  land,  as 
nothing  short  of  that  would  avail  themy  This  is  taken 
from  the  memorable  report  of  a  cormnittee  of  the  House 
of  Lords,  in  1817,  on  which  report  the  cruel  dungeon  bill 
was  passed.  Now,  to  what  nouns  do  these  Pronouns 
lelate?  Who  are  the  fiotnlnatives  in  the  first  sentence? 
The  land-holder  and  the  fund-holder.,  to  be  siu'e ;  and, 
therefore,  to  them  do  the  Pronouns  relate.  These  lords 
mean,  doubtless,  that  the  peo2)le  had  been  told  that  the 
people  must  go  to  the  land ;  that  nothing  else  would  avail 
the  people ;  but,  though  they  mean  this,  they  do  not  say 
it ;  and  this  part  of  their  report  is  as  false  in  grammar  as 
other  parts  of  the  report  were  in  fact. 

179.  When  there  are  two  or  more  nouns  connected  by 
a  copulative  conjunction,  and  when  a  Personal  Pronoun  is 
made  use  of  to  relate  to  them,  or  stand  for  them,  you  must 
take  care  that  the  personal  Pronoun  agree  with  them  in 
number.  "He  was  fonder  of  nothing  than  of  loit  and 
raillery ;  but  he  is  far  from  being  happy  in  it."  This 
Doctor  Blair,  in  his  19th  Lecture,  says  of  Loi-d  Shaftes- 
bury. Either  %cit  and  raillery  are  one  and  the  same  thing, 
or  they  are  different  things;  if  the  former,  one  of  the 
Avords  is  used  unnecessai'ily ;  if  the  latter,  the  Pronoun 
.  ought  to  have  been  them  and  not  it. 

:;     "  I  learned  from  Macaulay never  to  be  afraid 

•?of  using  the  same  word  or  name  over  and  over  again,  if  by  that 
;  means  anything  could  be  added  to  clearness  or  force.  Macaulay 
■  never  goes  on,  like  some  writers,  talking  about  'the  former'  and 
'the  latter,'  'he,  she,  it,  they,'  through  clause  after  clause,  while 
his  reader  has  to  look  back  to  see  which  of  several  persons  it  is 
that  is  so  darkly  referred  to.  No  doubt  a  pronoun,  like  any  other 
word,  may  often  be  repeated  with  advantage,  if  it  is  perfectly 
clear  who  is  meant  by  the  pronoun.  And  with  Macaulay's  pro- 
nouns, it  is  always  perfectly  clear  who  is  meant  by  them." — E.  A. 


.(.<?   Relating  to  Pronouns.  119 

Freeman,  in  the  International  Review.  Quoted  by  A.  S.  Hill. 
I  have  frequently  noticed  that  there  is  a  misty  uncertainty  as  to  the 
meaning  of  sentences  in  which  "the  former"  and  "the  latter" 
occur.  How  often  one  is  obliged  to  stop  for  a  moment,  and  con- 
sider which  is  "the  former"  and  which  "the  latter"!  I  do  not 
say  you  must  not  use  these  words;  Cobbett,  you  see,  uses  them 
quite  clearly  in  tins  last  paragraph;  but  it  is,  generally,  better  to 
repeat  the  words  for  Avhich  they  stand. 

180.  When,  however,  the  nouns  take  the  disjunctive 
conjunction  or,  the  Pronoun  must  be  in  the  singular ;  as, 
'*  When  he  shoots  a  partridge,  a  pheasant,  or  a  woodcock, 
he  gives  it  away." 

181.  Nouns  of  number,  or  multitude,  such  as  Mob,  Far- 
liament,  liahhle.  House  of  Commons,  Regiment,  Court  of 
King's  Bench,  Den  of  Thieves,  and  the  like,  may  have 
Pronouns  agreeing  with  them  either  in  the  singular  or  in 
the  plural  number ;  for  we  may,  for  instance,  say  of  the 
House  of  Commons,  "  Thei/  refused  to  hear  evidence 
against  Castlereagh  when  Mi".  Maddox  accused  him  of 
having  sold  a  seat;"  or,  "-Zi  refused  to  hear  evidence." 
But  we  must  be  unifoim  in  our  use  of  the  Pronoun  in 
this  respect.  We  must  not,  in  the  same  sentence,  and 
appHcable  to  the  same  noun,  use  the  singular  in  one  part 
of  the  sentence  and  the  plufal  in  another  part.  We  must 
not,  in  speaking  of  the  House  of  Commons,  for  instance, 
say,  '■'■lliey  one  year  voted  unanimously  that  cheap  corn 
was  an  evil,  and  the  next  year-  it  voted  unanimously  that 
dear  corn  was  an  evil."  There  are  persons  who  pretend 
to  make  very  nice  distinctions  as  to  the  cases  when  these 
nouns  of  multitude  oiight  to  take  the  singular,  and  when 
they  ought  to  take  the  plural.  Pronoun ;  but  these  dis- 
tinctions are  too  nice  to  be  of  any  real  use.  The  rule  is 
this:  that  noiuis  of  multitude  may  take  either  the  singu- 
lar, or  the  plural,  Pronoim;  but  not  both  in  the  same 
sentence. 

Tiiis  will  never  do;  it  is  far  too  indefinite.  Tlie  pronoun  stand- 
ing for  a  noiui  of  multitude  is  used  in  the  singular  if  the  idea  of 


120  Syntax^ 

unity  is  to  be  conveyed,  and  in  the  plural  if  the  idea  of  plurality  ia 
to  be  conveyed.  Let  me  illustrate  with  some  of  these  very  nouns 
"which  Cobbett  so  sarcastically  huddles  together :  "Themobnovsr 
began  to  scatter  in  every  direction,  and  tliey  set  up  a  hideous  yell 
as  they  moved  off.  The  mob  came  on  in  one  compact  body,  and 
it  did  not  fail  to  press  itself  iXn-ongh.  the  gates  of  the  palace.  He 
liated  the  rabble,  because  they  hated  him.  The  rabble  of  New- 
York  Jms  a  language  and  a  literature  of  its  oven.  The  House  of 
Commons  could  not  agree  on  any  measure  of  Reform ;  so  they 
were  dismissed  by  the  king.  The  House  of  Commons  was  unani- 
mous in  condemning  the  obstructing  Irish  members,  and  it  sus- 
pended them  for  two  weeks.  When  the  Court  of  King's  Bench 
passed  sentence  on  Mr.  Cobbett,  it  refused  to  reconsider  its 
decision.  I  have  been  informed  that  there  was  some  diHerence 
cf  opinion  in  the  Court  of  King's  Bench  concerning  Mr.  Cobbett's 
<  asc,  though  they  refused  to  reconsider  their  decision.  Here  is  a 
den  of  thieves ;  suppress  it.  We  came  upon  a  den  of  thieves,  who 
were  so  numerous  that  we  did  not  venture  to  attack  them.''''  Thus, 
you  see,  that  the  singularity  or  plurality  of  the  pronoun  standing 
for  a  noun  of  multitude  depends  entirely  upon  whether  an  idea  of 
U7iity  or  of  plurality  is  to  be  conveyed. 

182.  As  to  gender.,  it  is  haxdly  possible  to  make  a  mis- 
take. There  ai'e  no  terminations  to  denote  gender,  except 
in  the  third  person  singular,  he.,  she,  or  it.  We  do,  how- 
ever, oiienpersoiiify  things.  Sjjjeaking  of  a  nation,  we  often 
say  she  ;  of  the  sun,  we  say  he  j  of  the  tnoon,  we  say  she. 
We  may  personify  things  at  our  pleasure ;  but  we  must 
take  care  to  be  consistent,  and  not  call  a  thing  he,  or  she, 
in  one  part  of  a  sentence,  and  it  in  another  part.  The 
occasions  when  you  ought  to  personify  things,  and  when 
you  ought  not,  cannot  be  stated  in  any  jirecise  rule. 
Your  own  taste  and  judgment  will  be  your  best  guides. 
I  shall  give  you  my  opinion  about  figm-es  of  speech  in  a 
futiu-e  Letter. 

In  an  article  on  Lo  igfellow,  in  the  North  American  Review  for 
July,  1882,  the  wiiter  speaks  of  meeting  "Mrs.  William  Cullea 
Bryant  and  her  dairghter,  and  others  of  my  countrymen ,"  but  you 
can  hardly  make  such  a  blunder  as  that. 

183.  Nouns  which  denote  sorts,  or  kinds,  cf  living  crea- 


As  Relating  to  JPro7iouns.  121 

tures,  and  which  do  not  of  themselves  distinguish  the 
male  from  the  female,  such  as  rabbit,  hare,  hog,  cat,  pheas- 
ant, fowl,  take  the  neuter  Pronoun,  unless  we  happen  to 
know  the  gender  of  the  individual  we  are  speaking  about. 
If  I  see  you  with  a  cock  pheasant  in  your  hand,  I  say, 
""Where  did  you  shoot  A^ml"'  but  if  you  tell  me  you 
have  SLpheasajit,  I  say,  "Where  did  you  shoot  it?'^  (See 
paragraphs  42  and  43. ) 

184.  The  personal  PronoTins  in  their  possessive  case 
must,  of  coiu-se,  agree  in  number  and  gender  with 
their  cori'espoudent  nouns  or  Pronouns :  "  John  and 
Thomas  have  been  so  foolish  as  to  sell  their  land  and  to 
purchase  what  is  called  stock;  but  their  sister,  who  has 
too  much  sense  to  depend  on  a  bubble  for  her  daily  bread, 
has  kept  her  land;  theirs  is  gone  forever;  but  hers  is 
safe."  So  they  must,  also,  in  then*  objective  case  :  "  John 
and  Thomas  will  lose  the  interest  of  then*  money,  which 
will  soon  cease  to  be  paid  to  them.  The  rents  of  then- 
sister  will  be  regularly  paid  to  her  ;  and  Richard  will  also 
enjoy  his  income,  which  is  to  be  paid  to  Mm  by  his  sister." 
If  there  be  nouns  of  both  genders  used  before  Pronouns, 
cai'e  must  be  taken  that  no  confusion  or  obscmity  arise 
from  the  misuse  of  the  Pronoun.  Hume  says:  "They 
declared  it  treason  to  attempt,  imagine,  or  speak  evil  of 
the  king,  queen,  or  Ids  heiis."  This  has,  at  least,  a  mean- 
ing, which  shuts  out  the  heu's  of  the  queen.  In  such  a 
case  the  feminine  as  well  as  the  mascuUne  pronoun  shovdd 
be  used:  "Ais  or  her  heu's." 

185.  Take  care,  in  using  the  personal  Pronouns,  not  to 
employ  the  objective  case  where  you  ought  to  employ  the 
nominative;  and  take  care  also  of  the  oj^posite  error. 
"Him  strikes  I:  Her  loves  he."  These  offend  the  ear  at 
once.  But  when  a  number  of  words  come  in  between 
the  discordant  parts,  the  ear  does  not  detect  the  error. 
"It  was  3ome  >f  tho.3e  who  came  hither  last  night,  and 
went  away  this  morning,  who  did  the  mischief,  and  not 

6 


122  Syntax, 

my  brother  and  /«e."  It  ought  to  be  "  my  brother  and  /." 
For  I  am  not,  in  this  instance,  the  object  but  the  actor,  or 
supposed  actor.  "  "Who  broke  that  glass  ?  "  "Itwaswie." 
It  ought  to  be  I;  that  is  to  say,  "It  was  I xoho  broke  it.'" 
Fill  up  the  sentence  with  all  the  words  that  are  under- 
stood ;  and  if  there  be  eiTors,  you  will  soon  discover  them. 
After  the  words  than  and  as,  this  error,  of  putting  the 
objective  for  the  nominative,  is  frequently  committed;  as, 
"John  was  very  rich,  but  Peter  was  richer  than  him; 
and,  at  the  same  time,  as  learned  as  him,  or  any  of  his 
family."  It  ought  to  be  richer  than  he ;  as  learned  as  he; 
for  the  full  meaning  here  is,  "richer  than  he  was;  as 
learned  as  he  toas."  But  it  does  not  always  happen  that 
the  nominative  case  comes  after  than  or  as.  "  I  love  you 
more  than  him ;  I  give  you  more  than  him ;  I  love  you 
as  well  as  him  ;  "  that  is  to  say,  I  love  you  more  than  / 
love  him ;  I  give  you  more  than  I  give  to  him ;  I  love 
you  as  well  as  I  love  him,.  Take  away  him,  and  put  he,  in 
all  these  cases,  and  the  granunar  is  just  as  good,  only  the 
meaning  is  quite  different.  "I  love  you  as  well  as  him,'' 
means  that  I  love  you  as  well  as  I  love  him ;  but  "I 
love  you  as  well  as  Ae,"  means,  that  I  love  you  as  well  as 
he  loves  you. 

186.  You  see,  then,  of  what  importance  this  distinction 
of  cases  is.  But  you  must  not  look  for  this  word,  or  that 
word,  coming  before  or  coming  after  to  be  your  guide. 
It  is  reason  which  is  to  be  your  sole  guide.  When  the 
person  or  thing  represented  by  the  Pronoun  is  the  object, 
then  it  must  be  in  the  objective  case ;  when  it  is  the  actor, 
or  when  it  is  merely  the  person  or  thing  said  to  be  this  or 
that,  then  it  must  be  in  the  nominative  case.  Read  again 
paragraphs  46,  47,  and  48,  of  Letter  V. 

187.  The  errors  committed  with  regard  to  the  con- 
founding of  cases  arise  most  fi-equently  when  the  Pro- 
nouns are  placed,  in  the  sentences,  at  a  great  distance 
from  the  words  which  ai"e  connected  with  them,  and  which 


As  Relating  to  Pronouns.  123 

determine  the  case,  "//e  and  his  sister,  and  not  their 
uncle  and  cousins,  the  estate  was  given  to."  Here  is 
nothing  that  sotmds  hai'sh ;  but,  bi'ing  the  Prono\in  close 
to  the  preposition  that  demands  the  objective  case;  say 
the  estate  was  given  to  he ;  and  then  you  perceive  tho 
grossness  of  the  error  in  a  moment.  "The  work  of 
national  ruin  was  pretty  effectually  caiTied  on  by  the 
ministers;  but  more  effectually  by  the  paper-money 
makers  than  they.'''  This  does  not  hiut  the  ear;  but  it 
ought  to  be  them ;  "more  effectually  than  by  them.''' 

188.  The  Pronouns  mine,  thine,  theirs,  yours,  hers,  his, 
stand  fi'equently  by  themselves;  that  is  to  say,  not  fol- 
lowed by  any  no\ra.  But  then  the  noun  is  understooiJ. 
"That  is  A<^rs."  That  is  to  say,  her  projoer^y  y  her  Aa<,  or 
whatever  else.  No  difficulty  can  arise  in  the  use  of  these 
words. 

Except  one.  Some  people  erroneously  write  these  words  with 
an  apostrophe;  owr's,  etc.  A  gentleman  once  showed  me  a  letter 
which  he  considered  perfect.  So  it  was ;  all  except  the  last  two 
words,  which  were  written  thus:  "  Your's  truely." 

189.  But  the  use  of  the  personal  Pronoun  it  is  a  subject 
of  considerable  importance.  Read  again  paragraphs  60 
and  61,  Letter  VI.  Think  well  upon  what  you  find  there ; 
and  when  you  have  done  that,  proceed  with  me.  This 
Pronoun  with  the  verb  to  be  is  in  constant  use  in  our 
language.  To  say,  "  Yoiu'  uncle  came  hither  last  night," 
is  not  the  same  thing  as  to  say,  "7i  icas  your  uncle  who 
came  hither  last  night,"  though  the  fact  related  be  the 
same.  '•  It  is  I  who  write "  is  very  different  from  "  I . 
write,''  though  in  both  cases,  my  writing  is  the  fact  very 
clearly  expressed,  and  is  one  and  the  same  fact.  "7)5  is 
those  men  who  deserve  well  of  their  country,"  means  a 
great  deal  more  than  '■^  Those  men  deserve  well  of  then- 
country."  The  principal  verbs  are  the  same ;  the  prepo- 
sitions are  the  same;  but  the  real  meaning  is  different. 
*^It  is  the  dews  and  showers  that  make  the  grass  grow," 


124  Syntax, 

is   very   different    from   merely    obsei-ving,    ^'•De'ws   and 
showers  make  the  grass  grow." 

190.  Doctor  Lowth  has  given  it  as  his  opinion,  that  it 
is  not  correct  to  place  plural  nouns  or  pronouns  after  the 
it,  thus  used ;  an  opinion  which  arose  fr-oju  the  want  of  a 
little  more  reflection.  The  it  has  nothing  to  do,  gram- 
matically speaking,  with  the  rest  of  the  sentence.  The  it, 
together  with  the  verb  to  he,  express  states  of  being,  in 
some  instances,  and  in  others  this  phrase  serves  to  mark, 
in  a  strong  manner,  the  subject,  in  a  mass,  of  what  is  about 
to  be  affii'med  or  denied.  Of  course,  this  phrase,  which 
is  in  almost  incessant  use,  may  be  followed  by  nouns  and 
pronouns  in  the  singular,  or  in  the  plvu*al  number.  I 
forbear  to  multij)ly  examjiles,  or  to  enumerate  the  various 
ways  in  which  this  phrase  is  used,  because  one  grain  of 
reasoning  is  worth  whole  tons  of  memory.  The  2>rmciple 
being  once  in  your  mind,  it  will  be  ready  to  be  applied 
to  every  class  of  cases,  and  every  pai'ticular  case  of  each 
class. 

An  example,  however,  often  sticks  where  the  priuciple  fails  to 
do  so.  "ItisI;  it  is  thou;  it  is  he;  it  is  she;  it  is  we;  it  is  you; 
it  is  they;  it  is  the  devil;  it  is  the  devils."  These  are  all  correct; 
because  it  is  the  subject,  is  is  the  predicate,  and  what  follows  is 
the  attribute,  which  may  be  singular  or  plural. — I  cannot  help 
remarking  that  the  pause  after  "thus  used"  in  the  third  line  of 
the  above  paragraph  is  a  capital  example  of  the  place  where  the 
DASU  ought  to  be  used. 

191.  For  want  of  reliance  on  principles,  instead  of  ex- 
amples, how  the  latter  have  swelled  in  number,  and 
grammar-books  in  bulk !  But  it  is  much  easier  to  quote 
examples  than  to  lay  down  principles.  For  want  of  a 
little  thought  as  to  the  matter  immediately  before  us, 
some  grammarians  have  found  out  "an  absolute  case,'"'  as 
they  call  it;  and  Mr.  Lindley  Murray  gives  an  instance 
of  it  in  these  words :  "  Shame  being  lost,  all  virtue  is  lost." 
The  full  meaning  of  the  sentence  is  this :  It  being,  or  the 


As  Melating  to  PronotDifi.  125 

■State  of  things  being  such,  that  "shame  is  lost,  all  viitue 
is  lost." 

This  "  shame  being  lost "  is  culled  by  some  grammarians  a  parti- 
cipial phrase;  by  others,  an  abridged  participial  clause,  standing 
for  "As  shame  is  lost."  Therefore,  "all  virtue  is  lost,  as  shame 
is  lost;"  the  second  clause  modifying  the  first.  "On  arriving  in 
London,  I  went  to  see  ]\Iadame  Tussaud's  Exhibition."  These  first 
four  words  form  another  such  participial  phrase  or  abridged  parti- 
cipial clause,  modifying  went:  "I  went,  on  arriving  in  London 
(when  I  arrived  in  London),  to  see  Madame  Tussaud's  Exhibi- 
tion."— -This  absolute  case  is  something  like  what  other  grammarians 
call  the  independent  case:  "Charles,  mind  what  you  are  about. 
Sir,  I  deny  the  charge.  I  have  seen  a  wax  figure  of  Cobbett, 
boys,  at  Madame  Tussaud's  E.xhibition."  Charles,  Sir,  boys,  are 
here  said  to  be  in  the  independent  case,  because  they  have  no 
bearing  on  any  other  part  of  the  sentence.  These  words  may, 
liowevcr,  be  resolved  into  the  nominative  case,  thus:  To  }''0U, 
whose  name  is  Charles,  I  have  this  to  say :  mind  what  you  are 
about.  To  you,  who  are  a  Sir — to  you,  who  are  boys,  etc. 
Remember,  therefore,  that  any  word  standing  alone  like  these,  or 
in  an  exclamation — O  Roscoe !  Roscoe !  what  an  ass  you  have 
made  of  yourself! — is  said  to  be  in  the  independent  case. 

192.  Owing-  to  not  seeing  the  use  and  powex-  of  this  it 
in  theu"  true  light,  many  persons,  after  long  puzzling, 
think  they  must  make  the  pronouns  which  immediately 
follow  conform  to  the  cases  which  the  verbs  and  pre- 
positions of  the  sentence  demand.  "It  is  them,  and  not 
the  people,  whom  I  address  myself  to.''  "It  was  hiniy 
and  not  the  other  man,  that  I  sought  after.'' '  The  prepo- 
sitions to  and  after  demand  an  objective  case;  and  they 
have  it  in  the  words  v^hora  and  that.  The  Pronouns 
which  follow  the  it  and  the  verb  to  he  must  always  be  in 
the  nominative  case.  And,  therefore,  in  the  above  ex- 
amples, it  should  be,  "It  is  they,  and  not  the  other 
people;"  "It  was  he,  and  not  the  other  man." 

193.  This  it  with  its  verb  to  be  is  sometimes  employed 
with  the  preposition  for,  with  singular  force  and  effect. 
*^It  is  for  the  guilty  to  live  in  fear,  to  skulk  and  to  hang 


126  Syntax, 

their  heads ;  but  for  the  innocent  it  is  to  enjoy  ease  and 
tranquilhty  of  mind,  to  scorn  all  tlisguise,  and  to  carry 
themselves  erect."  This  is  much  more  forcible  than  tt> 
say,  "The  guilty  generally  live  in  feai*,"  and  so  on. 
throughout  the  sentence.  The  word  for,  in  this  case, 
denotes  appropriateness,  or  fitness;  and  the  full  expres- 
sion would  be  this:  "To  the  state  of  being,  or  state  of 
things  called  guiltmess,  to  live  in  fear  is  fitting,  or  is 
appropriate.''  If  you  pay  attention  to  the  reason  on  which 
the  use  of  these  words  is  founded,  you  will  never  be  at  a 
loss  to  use  them  properly. 

194.  The  word  it  is  the  gieatest  ti'oubler  that  I  know 
of  in  language.  It  is  so  small,  and  so  convenient,  that 
few  are  careful  enough  in  using  it.  Writers  seldom  spare 
this  word.  ^\1ienever  they  are  at  a  loss  for  either  a  nomi- 
native or  an  objective  to  theii*  sentence,  they,  without  any 
kind  of  ceremony,  clap  in  an  it.  A  very  remarkable  in- 
stance of  this  pressing  of  poor  it  into  actual  service,  con- 
trary to  the  laws  of  grammar  and  of  sense,  occui'S  in  a 
piece  of  composition,  where  we  might,  with  justice,  insist 
on  correctness.  This  piece  is  on  the  subject  of  gi-ammar ; 
it  is  a  piece  written  by  a  doctor  of  divinity,  and  read  by 
him  to  students  in  gi-ammar  and  language  in  an  academy ; 
and  the  very  sentence  that  I  am  now  about  to  quote  is 
selected,  by  the  author  of  a  gi-ammar,  as  testimony  of 
high  authority  in  favor  of  the  excellence  of  his  work. 
Surely,  if  correctness  be  ever  to  be  expected,  it  must  be 
in  a  case  like  this.  I  allude  to  two  sentences  in  the 
"Charge  of  the  Revekend  Doctor  Abercrombie  to  the 
Senior  Class  of  the  Philadelphia  Academy,"  published  in 
1806 ;  which  sentences  have  been  selected  and  published 
by  Mr.  Lindley  Murray,  as  a  testimonial  of  the  merits  of 
his  grammar ;  and  which  sentences  ai'e,  by  Mr.  Murray, 
given  to  us  in  the  following  words :  "  The  unwearied 
exertions  of  this  gentleman  have  done  more  towards  elu- 
cidating the  obscurities,  and  embellishing  the  structure 


As   Relating  to  Pronouris.  127 

of  our  language,  thau  any  other  writer  on  the  subject. 
Such  a  toork  has  long  been  wanted ;  and,  from  the  success 
with  which  it  is  executed,  cannot  be  too  highly  appre- 
ciated." 

195.  As,  in  the  learned  Doctor's  opinion,  obscurities 
can  be  elucidated,  and,  as,  in  the  same  opinion,  Mb.  Mur- 
ray is  an  able  hand  at  this  kind  of  work,  it  would  not  be 
amiss  were  the  grammarian  to  try  his  skill  upon  this 
article  from  the  hand  of  his  dignified  eulogist ;  for  here 
is,  if  one  may  use  the  expression,  a  constellation  of 
obscurities.  Our  poor  oppressed  it^  which  we  find  forced 
into  the  Doctor's  service  in  the  second  sentence,  relates 
to  "  such  a  work,""  though  this  work  is  nothing  that  has 
un  existence,  notwithstanding  it  is  said  to  be  "  executed.'" 
In  the  first  sentence,  the  "  exertions  "  become,  all  of  a 
Hudden,  a  '■'■  \oriter  f  the  exertions  have  done  more  than 
*'  any  other  wi'iter ;"  for,  mind  you,  it  is  not  the  gentleman 
that  has  done  anything;  it  is  "the  exertions''''  that  have 
<lone  what  is  said  to  be  done.  The  word  gentleman  is  in 
the  possessive  case,  and  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  action 
of  the  sentence.  Let  us  give  the  sentence  a  turn,  and 
the  Doctor  and  the  grammarian  will  hear  how  it  will 
sound.  "  This  gentleman's  exertions  have  done  more 
than  any  other  writer^  This  is  upon  a  level  with  "  This 
gentleman's  dog  has  killed  moi-e  hares  than  any  other 
sportsma7iy  No  doubt  Doctor  Aberceombie  meant  to 
say,  "the  exertions  of  this  gentleman  have  done  more 
than  those  of  any  other  writer.  Such  a  w^ork  as  this 
gentleman's  has  long  been  wanted :  his  work,  seeing  the 
successful  manner  of  its  execution,  cannot  be  too  highly 
commended."  Meant!  No  doubt  at  all  of  that!  And 
when  we  hear  a  Hampshire  ploughboy  say,  "  Poll  Cherry- 
<heek  have  giv'd  I  thick  handkechei',"  we  know  very  well 
that  he  means  to  say,  "  Poll  Cherrycheek  has  given  me 
this  handkerchief ;"  and  yet,  we  are  but  too  apt  to  laugh 
at  him,  and  to  call  him  ignorant ;  which  is  wi'ong;  be- 


128  Syntax, 

cause  he  has  no  pretensions  to  a  knowledge  of  grammar, 
and  he  may  be  very  skillful  as  a  ploughboy.  However, 
we  will  not  laugh  at  Doctor  Abercrombie,  whom  I  knew, 
many  years  ago,  for  a  very  kind  and  worthy  man,  and 
who  baptized  your  elder  brother  and  elder  sister.  But  if 
we  may,  in  any  case,  be  allowed  to  laugh  at  the  ignorance 
of  our  fellow-creatures,  that  case  certainly  does  arise  when 
we  see  a  professed  grammarian,  the  author  of  voluminous 
precepts  and  examples  on  the  subject  of  grammar,  pro- 
ducing, in  imitation  of  the  possessors  of  invaluable  medi- 
cal secrets,  testimonials  vouching  for  the  efficacy  of  his 
literary  panacea,  and  when,  in  those  very  testimonials,  we 
Qnd  most  flagrant  instances  of  bad  grammar. 

196.  However,  my  dear  James,  let  this  strong  and 
striking  instance  of  the  misuse  of  the  word  it  serve  you 
in  the  way  of  caution.  Never  put  an  it  upon  paper  with- 
out thinking  well  of  what  you  are  about.  When  I  see 
many  its  in  a  page,  I  always  tremble  for  the  writer. 

197.  We  now  come  to  the  second  class  of  Pronouns ; 
that  is  so  say,  the  Relative  Pronouns,  of  which  you  have 
had  some  account  in  Letter  VI,  paragraphs  62,  63,  64, 
65,  and  66 ;  which  pai-agraphs  you  should  now  read  over 
again  with  attention. 

198.  Who,  which  becomes  lohose  in  the  possessive  case, 
and  whom  in  the  objective  case,  is,  in  its  use,  confined  to 
rational  beings;  for  though  some  writers  do  say,  "the 
country  xohose  fertility  is  great,"  and  the  like,  it  is  not 
con-ect.  We  must  say,  "the  country  the  fertility  of 
whichP  But  if  ^e  personify  ;  if,  for  instance,  we  call  a 
nation  a  she,  or  the  sun  a  he,  we  must  then,  if  we  have 
need  of  relative  Pronouns,  take  these,  or  the  word  that, 
which  is  a  relative  applicable  to  rational  as  well  as  irra- 
tional and  even  inanimate  beings. 

It  is  now  correct  to  say  "the  country  whose  fertility  is  great;" 
for  it  is  a  much  more  direct  and  easy  way  of  speaking  than  the 
other.  This  form  was  begun  by  the  poets,  and  is  now  constantly 
used  by  prose- writers. 


As  Relating  to  Pronouns.  129 

199.  The  errors  which  are  most  frequent  in  the  use  of 
these  relative  Pronouns  arise  from  not  taking  cai'e  to  uso 
whx)  and  whom^  when  they  are  respectively  demanded  by 
the  verbs  or  prepositions.  "  To  tcho  did  you  speak  ? 
"Whom  is  come  to-day  ?  "  These  sentences  are  too  glar- 
ingly wrong  to  pass  from  ovu:  pens  to  the  paper.  But,  as 
in  the  case  of  personal  Pronouns,  when  the  relatives  are 
placed,  in  the  sentence,  at  a  distance  from  their  ante- 
cedents, or  verbs  or  prepositions,  the  ear  gives  us  no 
assistance.  "  Who,  of  all  the  men  in  the  world,  do  you 
think  I  saic,  the  other  day?  Who,  for  the  sake  of  his 
numerous  services,  the  office  was  given  to."  In  both 
these  cases  it  ought  to  be  tchotn.  Bring  the  verb  in  the 
first,  and  the  preposition  in  the  second  case,  closer  to  the 
relative ;  as,  who  I  saw ;  to  who  the  office  teas  given  / 
and  you  will  see  the  eiTor  at  once.  But  take  care! 
"  Whom  of  all  men  in  the  world,  do  you  think  was  chosen 
to  be  sent  as  an  ambasssador?  TFAom,  for  the  sake  of 
his  numerous  services,  had  an  office  of  honor  bestowed 
upon  him."  These  are  nominative  cases,  and  ought  to 
havei/^Ao/  that  is  to  say,  "wAo  loas  chosen;  who  had  an 
office.'''  I  will  not  load  you  with  numerous  examples. 
Read  again  about  the  nominative  and  objective  cases  in 
Letter  V.  Apply  yom'  reason  to  the  subject.  Who  is 
the  nominative,  and  whom  the  objective.  Think  well 
about  the  matter,  and  you  will  want  no  more  examples. 

200.  There  is,  however,  an  erroneous  way  of  employing 
whom,  which  I  must  point  out  to  your  pai'ticular  atten- 
tion, because  it  is  so  often  seen  in  very  good  writers,  and 
because  it  is  very  deceiving.  "The  Duke  of  Argyle, 
ttian  whom,  no  man  was  more  heaity  in  the  cause." 
"Cromwell,  than  whom  no  man  was  better  skilled  in  arti- 
fice." A  hundi'ed  such  phrases  might  be  collected  from 
Hume,  Blackstone,  and  even  from  Doctors  Blair  and 
Johnson.  Yet  they  are  bad  grammar.  In  all  such  cases, 
who  should  be  made  use  of ;  for  it  is  nominative  and  not 
6* 


130  Syntax, 

objective.  "No  man  was  more  hearty  in  the  cause  than 
he  was/  no  man  was  better  skilled  in  artifice  than  he 
wasy  It  is  a  very  common  Parliament-house  phrase,  and 
therefore  presumptively  corrupt;  but  it  is  a  Doctor 
Johnson  phrase  too;  "Pope,  than  whom,  few  men  had 
more  vanity."  The  Doctor  did  not  say,  "Myself,  than 
whom  few  men  have  been  found  more  base,  having,  in  my 
Dictionary,  described  a  pensioner  as  a  slave  of  state,  and 
having  afterwards  myself  become  a  pensioner.'' 

201.  I  differ,  as  to  this  matter,  from  Bishop  Lowth, 
who  says  that  "  the  relative  who,  having  reference  to  no 
verb  or  preposition  understood,  but  only  to  its  antece- 
dent, when  it  follows  than,  is  alioays  in  the  objective  case  ; 
even  though  the  Pronoun,  if  substituted  in  its  place, 
would  be  in  the  nominative."  And  then  he  gives  an  in- 
stance from  IVIilton.  "Beelzebub,  than  whom,  Satan 
except,  none  higher  sat."  It  is  emious  enough  that  this 
sentence  of  the  Bishop  is,  itself,  ungrammatical !  Our 
poor  unfortunate  it  is  so  placed  as  to  make  it  a  matter  of 
doubt  whether  the  Bishop  meant  it  to  relate  to  \oho,  or  to 
its  antecedent.  However,  we  know  his  meaning;  but, 
though  he  says  that  who,  when  it  follows  than,  is  always 
in  the  objective  case,  he  gives  us  no  reason  for  this  de- 
partiu'e  from  a  clear  general  principle ;  unless  we  are  to 
regai'd  as  a  reason  the  example  of  Milton,  who  has  com- 
mitted many  hirndreds,  if  not  thousands,  of  grammatical 
errors,  many  of  which  the  Bishop  himself  has  pointed  out 
There  is  a  sort  of  side-wind  attempt  at  a  reason  in  the 
words,  "having  reference  to  no  verb  or  preposition  under- 
stood." I  do  not  see  the  reason,  even  if  this  could  be; 
for  it  appears  to  me  impossible  that  a  Norm  or  Pronoun 
can  exist  in  a  grammatical  state  without  having  reference 
to  some  verb  or  preposition,  either  expressed  or  under- 
stood. "What  is  meant  by  Milton?  "Than  Beelzebub 
none  sat  higher,  except  Satan."  And  when,  in  order  to 
avoid  the  repetition  of  the  word  Beelzebub,  the  relative 


As  Relating  to  Pronouns.  131 

becomes  necessary,  the  full  construction  must  be,  "no 
devil  Slit  higlier  than  who  sat,  except  Satan;"  and  not 
*'no  devil  sat  higher  than  whom  sat."  The  supposition 
that  there  can  be  a  Noun  or  Pronoun  which  has  reference 
to  no  verb,  and  no  preposition,  is  certainly  a  mistake. 

Mr.  Swinton  quotes  these  two  sentences  about  Pope  and  Beelze- 
bub, and  then  says:  "This  construction  must  be  regarded  aB 
anomalous;  but  it  has  been  used  by  so  many  reputable  authors 
that  we  can  scarcely  refuse  to  accept  it."  It  seems  to  me  that  this 
is  one  of  those  cases  where  long  usage  has  made  a  faulty  expression 
appear  or  sound  correct ;  just  as  there  are  many  people  who  think 
"it  is  me"  sounds  much  better  than  "it  is  I."  I  am  sure  "than 
whom "  is  now  much  more  rarely  used  than  formerly. 

202.  That,  as  a  relative,  may,  as  we  have  seen,  be  ap- 
phed  either  to  persons  or  things ;  but  it  has  no  possessive 
<;ase,  and  no  change  to  denote  the  other  two  cases.  We 
say,  "the  man  that  gives,  and  the  man  that  a  thing  is 
given  to.'"  But  there  aie  some  instances  when  it  can 
hardly  be  called  proper  to  use  that  instead  of  wfio  or 
whom.  Thus,  directly  after  a  proper  name,  as  in  Hume: 
"The  Queen  gave  orders  for  taking  into  custody  the 
Duke  of  Northumberland,  who  fell  on  his  knees  to  the 
Earl  of  Arundel,  that  arrested  him."  Who  would  have 
been  much  better,  though  there  was  a  who  just  before  in 
the  sentence.  In  the  same  author:  "Douglas,  who  had 
prepared  his  people,  and  that  was  bent  upon  taking  his 
part  openly."  This  never  ought  to  be,  though  we  see  it 
continually.  Either  may  do ;  but  both  never  ought  to  be 
relatives  of  the  same  antecedent,  in  the  same  sentence. 
And,  indeed,  it  is  very  awkward,  to  say  the  least  of  it,  to 
use  both  in  the  same  sentence,  though  relating  to  different 
antecedents,  if  all  these  be  names  of  rational  beings.  "  The 
Lords,  who  made  the  first  false  report,  and  the  Commons, 
that  seemed  to  vie  with  then*  Lordships  in  falsehood,  be- 
came equally  detested."  l^hat,  as  a  relative,  cannot  take 
the  preposition  or  verb  immediately  before  it.  I  may  say 
"  The  man  to  whom  I  gave  a  book ; "  but  I  cannot  say,  "  the 


132  Syntax, 

man  to  that  I  gave  a  book ; "  nor  "the  knife  to  that  I  put  a 
handle."  "Having  defeated  tchom,  he  remained  quiet;" 
but  we  cannot,  in  speaking  of  persons,  say,  "Having  de- 
feated that,  he  remained  quiet." 

203.  Which,  as  a  relative  Pronoun,  is  apphed  to  irra- 
tional beings  only,  and,  as  to  those  beings,  it  may  be  em- 
ployed indifferently  with  that,  except  in  the  cases  where 
the  relative  comes  directly  after  a  verb  or  a  preposition, 
in  the  manner  just  spoken  of.  We  say,  "the  town,  the 
horse,  the  tree,  lohich ;  or  to  which  f  and  so  on.  And 
we  say,  "  the  town,  the  tree,  the  horse,  that ;  "  but  not  to 
or  for  that. 

204.  We  may,  in  speaking  of  nouns  of  multitude,  when 
the  multitude  consists  of  rational  creatures,  and  when  we 
choose  to  consider  it  as  a  singular  noun,  make  use  of  wJio 
or  ichom,  or  of  which,  just  as  we  please.  We  may  say, 
"the  crowd  which  was  going  up  the  street;"  or  "the 
crowd  who  was  going  up  the  street ;"  but  we  cannot 
make  use  of  both  in  the  same  sentence  and  relating  to 
the  same  noun.  Therefore,  we  cannot  say,  "  the  crowd 
who  was  going  up  the  street  and  which  was  making  a 
gi'eat  noise."  We  must  take  the  ^oho,  or  the  which,  in 
both  places.  If  such  noun  of  multitude  be  used  in  the 
plural  number,  we  then  go  on  with  the  idea  of  the 
rationality  of  the  iuchviduals  in  our  minds ;  and  therefore 
we  make  use  of  v^ho  and  vjhom.  "  The  assembly,  inho 
rejected  the  petition,  but  to  xohom  another  was  immedi- 
ately presented." 

205.  Who,  xohose,  xohom,  and  which,  are  employed  in 
asking  questions ;  to  which,  in  this  capacity,  we  must  add 
what.     ^'■Who   is  in  the  house?     Whose   gun  is   that? 

Whom  do  you  love  best?  What  has  happened  to-day?" 
What  means,  generally,  as  a  relative,  "  the  thing  which;'''' 
as,  "  Give  me  what  I  want."  It  may  be  used  in  the  nom- 
inative and  in  the  objective  case:  "What  happens  to-day 
may  happen  next  week ;  but  I  know  not  to  what  we  shall 


As  Relating  to  J^ronouns.  133 

come  at  last ;"  or,  "  The  thing  which  happens  to-day  may 
happen  next  week ;  but  I  know  not  the  thing  which  we 
shall  come  to  at  last." 

Tliis  little  word  what  may,  sometimes,  curiously  enough,  be  both 
subject  and  object  iu  the  same  sentence.  "Give  what  is  proper. 
Tell  me  what  was  done."  In  the  first  sentence,  what  is  the  object 
otgive  and  the  subject  of  is  proper ;  and  may  be  set  down  as  equal 
to  that  which.  In  the  second  sentence,  tchat  is  the  object  of  tell 
and  the  subject  of  was  done;  me  being  the  indirect  object,  or 
adverbial  phrase,  meaning  to  me.  You  may  also  say  that  the  whole 
clause  what  loas  done  is  the  object  of  tell,  and  call  it  an  objective 
clause. 

Notice  that  the  relative  pronoun  is  sometimes  omitted,  but  only 
in  the  objective  case ;  as.  You  are  the  boy  (whom)  I  mean;  this  is 
the  book  (that)  1  want.  This  omission  of  words,  which  gram- 
marians call  an  ellipsis,  is  very  common  in  our  tongue ;  as.  Dinner 
done,  we  walked  into  the  garden ;  that  argument  granted,  I  pro- 
ceed to  the  next. 

The  place  of  the  relative  pronoun  is  a  mighty  important  matter. 
Somebody  sent  Mr.  White  this  striking  instance  of  such  misplace- 
ment: "Just  now,  I  saw  a  man  talking  to  the  Rev.  Mr.  Blank, 
who  was  so  drunk  that  he  could  hardly  stand."  The  last  two 
clauses  were  intended,  of  course,  to  come  after  ma/i,  who  was 
drunk,  and  not  the  reverend  j!;entlcnian  Here  are  some  striking 
examples  from  Greene's  Grammar :  "  Mr.  Brown  needs  a  physician 
who  is  sick.  The  oranges  came  in  a  basket  which  we  ate.  Found, 
a  gold  watch  by  a  gentleman  with  steel  hands.  A  man  brought 
home  my  Newfoundland  dog  in  his  shirt-sleeves."  These  last  two 
sentences  have  no  relative  pronoun,  but  they  are  good  examples  of 
misplacement  of  words.  "I  told  you  to  do  that  this  morning"  is 
a  very  different  thing  from  "  I  told  you,  this  morning,  to  do  that.'' 

Here  is  an  advertisement  which  I  have  just  noticed  in  the 
Tribune:  "Conditioned  scholai-s  coached  for  fall  examinations 
during  the  summer  months  at  Tarrytown."  These  words,  as  they 
stand,  mean  that  the  scholars  are  to  be  coached  (that  is,  prepared) 
for  fall  examinations,  taking  place  during  the  summer  months  at 
Tarrytown ;  but  the  advertiser  did  not  mean  anything  of  the  kind. 
He  meant  to  say,  "Conditioned  scholars  coached,  during  the  sum- 
mer  months,  at  Tarrytown,  for  fall  examinations."  You  will  say 
that  the  fall  examinations  could  not  be  during  the  swwmer  months. 
No ;  but  the  words  say  so. 


134  Syntax, 

206.  Which,  though  in  other  cases  it  cannot  be  em- 
ployed as  a  relative  with  nouns  which  are  the  names  of 
rational  beiags,  is,  with  such  nouns,  employed  in  asking 
questions ;  as,  "  The  tyi'ants  allege  that  the  petition  was 
disrespectful.  TFAecA  of  the  tyrants?"  Agaia:  "One  of 
the  petitioners  had  his  head  cleaved  by  the  yeomanry. 

Which?'''     That  is  to  say,   "Which  of   the  petitioners 
was  it?" 

207.  What,  when  used  in  asking  for  a  repetition  of 
what  has  been  said — as,  what? — means,  "Tell  me  that 
which,  or  the  thing  which,  you  have  said."  This  word  is 
used,  and  with  great  force,  in  the  way  of  exclamation: 
"  What !  rob  us  of  oirr  right  of  suffrage,  and  then,  when 
we  pray  to  have  oui'  right  restored  to  us,  shut  us  up  in 
dungeons!"  The  fvill  meaning  is  this:  "  What  do  they  do? 
They  rob  us  of  our  right." 

208.  It  is  not,  in  general,  advisable  to  crowd  these  rela- 
tives together ;  but  it  sometimes  happens  that  it  is  done, 
"  Who,  that  has  any  sense,  can  believe  such  jDalpable  false- 
hoods? What,  that  can  be  invented,  can  disguise  these 
falsehoods?  By  whom,  that  you  ever  heai-d  of,  was  a  par- 
don obtained  from  the  mercy  of  a  tyi-ant  ?  Some  men's 
rights  have  been  taken  from  them  by  force  and  by  genius, 
but  whose,  that  the  world  ever  heard  of  before,  were  taken 
away  by  ignorance  and  stupidity?" 

209.  Whosoever,  whosesoever,  whomsoever,  whatsoever, 
whichsoever,  follow  the  rules  applicable  to  the  original 
words.  The  so  is  an  adverb,  which,  in  its  general  accep- 
tation, means  in  like  manner ;  and  ever,  which  is  also  an 
adverb,  means,  at  any  time,  at  all  times,  or  always.  These 
two  words,  thus  joined  in  whosoever,  mean,  who  hi  any 
case  that  may  he  ;  and  so  of  the  other  three  words.  We 
sometimes  omit  the  so,  and  say,  tohoever,  whomever,  what- 
ever, and  even  whosever.  It  is  a  mere  abbreviation.  The 
so  is  understood ;  and  it  is  best  not  to  omit  to  write  it. 
Sometimes  the  soever  is  separated  from  the  Pronoun: 


As  Relating  to  Pronouns.  135 

"  WJiat  man  soever  he  might  be."  But  the  main  thing  is 
to  understand  the  reason  upon  which  the  use  of  these 
words  stands  ;  for,  if  you  understand  that,  you  will  always 
use  the  words  properly. 

210.  The  Demonstrative  Pronouns  have  been  described 
in  Letter  VI,  paragraph  67 ;  and  I  have  very  little  to  add 
to  what  is  there  said  upon  the  subject.  They  never 
change  their  endings  to  denote  gender  or  case ;  and  the 
proper  application  of  them  is  so  obvious  that  it  requires 
little  to  be  said  about  it.  However,  we  shall  hear  more  of 
these  Pronouns  when  we  come  to  the  Syntax  of  Verbs. 
One  observation  I  will  make  here,  however,  because  it  will 
serve  to  caution  you  against  the  commission  of  a  very 
common  error.  You  will  hai'dly  say,  '■'•Them  that  write;" 
but  you  may  say,  as  many  do,  "  We  ought  always  to  have 
great  regard  for  them  who  are  wise  and  good."  It 
ought  to  be,  ^^for  those  who  ai-e  wise  and  good ;"  because 
the  word  persons  is  understood :  "  those  persons  who  aro 
wise  and  good  ;"  and  it  is  bad  grammar  to  say,  "  them  per- 
sons who  are  wise  and  good."  But  observe,  in  another 
sense,  this  sentence  would  be  correct.  If  I  be  speakin^f 
of  particular  persons,  and  if  my  object  be  to  make  you 
understand  that  they  are  icise  and  good,  and  also  that  1 
love  them ;  then  I  say,  very  correctly,  "  I  love  them,  who 
ai'e  wise  and  good."  Thus :  "  The  father  has  two  childi'en ; 
he  loves  them,  who  are  wise  and  good ;  and  they  love  him, 
who  is  very  indulgent."  It  is  the  meaning  that  must  be 
your  guide,  and  reason  must  tell  you  what  is  the  meaning. 
"2%ey,  who  can  write,  save  a  great  deal  of  bodily  labor," 
is  very  different  from  "  Those  who  can  write  save  a  great 
deal  of  bodily  labor."  The  those  stands  for  those  persons; 
that  is  to  say,  any  persons,  persons  in  general,  who  can 
write:  whereas,  the  they,  as  here  used,  relates  to  some 
particular  persons;  and  the  sentence  means  that  these 
particular  persons  are  able  to  write,  and,  by  that  means, 
they  save  a  great  deal  of  bodily  labor.     Doctor  Blair,  in 


136  Syntax, 

his  21st  Lecture,  has  faJlen  into  an  error  of  this  sort: 
thus,  "These  two  paragraphs  are  extremely  worthy  of 
Mr.  Addison,  and  exhibit  a  style,  which  they,  who  can 
successfully  imitate,  may  esteem  themselves  happy."  It 
ought  to  be  those  instead  of  they.  But  this  is  not  the 
only  fault  in  this  sentence.  Wliy  say  "  extremely  worthy?" 
Worthi7iess  is  a  quality  which  hardly  admits  of  degrees, 
and  surely  it  does  not  admit  of  extremes/  Then,  again, 
at  the  close:  to  estee^n  is  to  prize,  to  set  value  on,  to 
value  highly.  How,  then,  can  men  "  esteem  themselves 
happy?"  How  can  thej prize  themselves  happy?  How 
can  they  highly  value  themselves  happy?  My  dear  James, 
let  chambermaids,  and  members  of  the  House  of  Commons, 
and  learned  Doctors,  write  thus:  be  you  content  with 
plain  words  which  convey  your  meaning ;  say  that  a  thing 
is  quite  worthy  of  a  man ;  and  that  men  may  deem  them- 
selves happy. — It  is  truly  curious  that  Lindley  Mureay 
should,  even  in  the  motto  in  the  title-page  of  his  JSnglish 
Gratnmar,  have  selected  a  sentence  containing  a  gram- 
matical error ;  still  more  curious  that  he  should  have 
found  this  sentence  in  Doctor  Blair's  Lectiures  on  Lan- 
guage ;  and  most  curious  of  all  that  this  sentence  should 
be  intended  to  inculcate  the  great  utility  of  correctness  in 
the  composing  of  sentences.  Here,  however,  are  the 
proofs  of  this  combination  of  curious  cu-cumstances : 
'■^They  who  are  learning  to  compose,  and  arrange  their 
sentences  with  accm-acy  and  order,  are  learning,  at  the 
same  time,  to  think  with  accuracy  and  order."  Poh! 
Never  think  a  man  either  learned  or  good  merely  on 
account  of  his  being  called  a  Doctor. 

211.  The  Indeterminate  Pronouns  have  been  enumerated 
in  Letter  VI,  parapraph  71.  They  are  sometimes  Adjec- 
tives, as  is  stated  in  that  paragraph.  Whoever,  whatever, 
and  whichever  (that  is,  whosoever,  whatsoever,  whichso- 
ever), though  relatives,  are  indeterminate  too.  But,  in- 
deed, it  signifies  little  how  these  words  are  classed.     It 


As  lielatlng  to  l*ronouns.  137 

is  the  use  of  tliem  that  we  ouglit  to  Icok  to.  JSvery, 
which  I  have  now  reckoned  amongst  these  Pronouns,  is 
never,  now-a-days,  used  without  a  noun,  and  is  therefore, 
in  fact,  an  -adjective.  The  error  that  is  most  frequently 
committed  in  using  these  Pronouns  is  the  putting  of  the 
plural  verb  or  phf?-al  Pronoun  after  nouns  preceded  by 
every,  each,  or  either;  especially  in  the  case  of  every :  as, 
•^ every  man ;  every  body;  every  house."  These  ai'e  under- 
stood to  mean,  all  the  men,  all  the  people,  all  the  houses; 
but,  only  one  man,  one  body,  one  house,  is  sj^oken  of,  and 
therefore  the  verb  ought  to  be  in  the  singular ;  as,  "  every- 
body ^s  disgusted;"  and  not  "everybody  are  disgusted." 

212.  Before  you  use  any  of  these  words,  you  should 
think  well  on  theii*  trice  ineaning;  for,  if  you  do  this,  you 
will  seldom  commit  errors  in  the  use  of  them.  Doctob 
Johnson,  in  his  Rambler,  No.  177,  has  this  passage: 
'■'■Every  one  of  these  virtuosos  looked  on  all  his  associates 
as  wietches  of  depraved  taste  and  narrow  notions.  Their 
conversation  was,  therefore,  fretful  and  waspish,  their  be- 
havior brutal,  t!.  eir  merriment  bluntly  sai'castic,  and  their 
seriousness  gloomy  and  suspicious."  Now  these  theirs 
certainly  relate  to  every  one,  though  the  author  meant, 
without  doubt,  that  they  should  relate  to  tlte  whole  body 
of  virtuosos,  including  the  every  one.  The  word  there- 
fore adds  to  the  confusion.  The  virtuosos  were,  there- 
fore, fretful  and  waspish.  What  for  ?  Was  it  because 
every  one  saw  his  associates  in  a  bad  light  ?  How  can  my 
thinking  meanly  of  others  make  their  conversation  fretful? 
If  the  Doctor  had  said,  "  These  virtuosos  looked  on  each 
other''''    .    .    .   the  meaning  would  have  been  cleai". 

213.  The  Pronoun  either,  which  means  07ie  of  two,  is 
very  often  improperly  employed.  It  is  sometimes  used 
to  denote  one  of  three  or  more,  which  is  always  incorrect. 
We  say,  ^'■either  the  dog,  or  the  cat  f  but  not  '■^either  the 
dog,  the  cat,  or  the  pig.''  Suppose  some  one  to  ask  me 
which  I  choose  to  have,  mutton,  veal,  or  woodcoclt;  I 


138  SyntaXy 

answer  any  one  of  them ;  and  not  either  of  them.  Doctor 
Blair  has  used  any  one  where  he  ought  to  have  used 
either:  "The  two  words  are  not  altogether  synonymous; 
yet,  in  the  present  case,  any  one  of  them  would  have  been 
sufficient." 

214.  In  concluding  this  Letter  on  the  Syntax  of  Pro- 
nouns, I  must  observe  that  I  leave  many  of  these  inde- 
terminate Pronouns  unnoticed  in  a  particular  manner. 
To  notice  every  one  individually  could  answer  no  purpose 
except  that  of  swelling  the  size  of  a  book ;  a  thing  which 
I  most  anxiously  wish  to  avoid. 

Sometimes  one  cannot  help  using  eithkr  .  .  .  ob  with  reference 
to  one  of  three  things.  Expressions  like  the  following  will 
be  found  in  the  works  of  the  best  authors ;  Either  the  Romans, 
the  Greeks,  or  the  Persians.  Neither  the  planters,  the  poor 
whites,  nor  the  blacks. 

Nearly  all  the  grammars  set  down  the  rule  that  one  must  use 
each  other  with  reference  to  two  persons,  and  one  anot?ier  with  refer- 
ence to  more  than  two.  I  have  not,  however,  found  a  single  author, 
good  or  bad,  that  adheres  to  this  rule.  When  you  are  speaking  of 
three  persons,  it  is  perhaps  better  to  say,  "They  love  one  another," 
than  "They  love  each  other;"  but  sometimes  these  words  have  to 
be  repeated  so  frequently  that  it  would  be  very  disagreeable  to  use 
always  the  same  word.  In  Punch's  Address  to  Brother  Jonathan, 
these  words  occur  almost  interchangeably:  "Let  us  quarrel,  Ameri- 
can kinsmen.  Let  us  plunge  into  war.  We  have  been  friends  too 
long.  We  have  too  highly  promoted  each  otJier's  wealth  and  pros- 
perity. We  are  too  plethoric ;  we  want  depletion  ;  to  which  end 
let  us  cut  one  another's  throats.  Let  us  sink  each  other's  shipping, 
bum  eaxh  other's  arsenals,  destroy  each  other^s  property  at  large. 
Let  our  banks  break  while  we  smite  and  slay  one  another.  Let  us 
maim  and  mutilate  one  another  ;  let  us  make  of  each  other  miserable 
objects,"  etc. — Notice  thatea«A  has  a  restricting  sense,  and  every  an 
extended  or  general  one.  "lie  examined  each  one;  he  examined 
every  one."  The  first  means  c«c/i  single  one;  the  second  means 
them  all,  in  a  general  sense.  "Ilcre  are  ten  lazy  boys ;  give  each 
one  a  caning.     Give  a  caning  to  every  lazy  boy  in  the  school." 

That  error  of  making  verbs  and  pronouns  agree  with  each  and 
mery,  as  if  these  words  were  plural,  is  as  common  to-day  as  it  was 
In  Cobbett's  time.     How  often  we  hear  such  expressions   as, 


As  Relating  to  Adjectives.  139^ 

"Everybody  have  their  faults — Every  one  are  dissatisfied — Let 
each  boy  and  girl  take  up  their  pens,"  etc.  These  are  all  wrong. 
Even  if  the  noun  with  each  or  evern/  be  repeated,  the  verb  or  pro- 
noun must  be  in  the  singular;  as,  "Each  day  and  each  hour  has 
its  duties ;  every  man  and  woman  has  his  or  h^r  peculiarities ;  every 
window  and  every  house-top  was  crowded  with  spectators."  Be- 
cause, in  these  instances,  the  predicate  or  verb  is  understood  after 
the  first  noun :  Every  window  was  crowded  and  every  house-top 
was  crowded. 


LETTER    XVIII. 

SYNTAX,    AS    RELATING    TO    ADJECTIVES. 

215.  By  this  time,  my  dear  James,  you  will  hardly  want 
to  be  reminded  of  the  nature  of  Adjectives.  However,  it 
may  not  be  amiss  for  you  to  read  again  attentively  the 
whole  of  Letter  VII. 

216.  Adjectives,  having  no  relative  effect,  containing  no 
representative  quality,  have  not  the  dangerous  power, 
possessed  by  pronoiins,  of  throwing  whole  sentences  into 
confusion,  and  of  perverting  or  totally  destroying  the 
writer's  meaning.  For  this  reason,  there  is  little  to  be 
said  respecting  the  using  of  Adjectives. 

217.  When  you  make  use  of  an  Adjective  in  the  way  of 
comparison,  take  care  that  there  be  a  congruity,  or  fitness, 
in  the  things  or  qualities  compared.  Do  not  say  that  a 
thing  is  deeper  than  it  is  broad  or  long;  or  that  a  man  is 
taller  than  he  is  wise  or  rich.  Hume  says,  "  The  principles 
of  the  Reformation  were  deeper  in  the  prince's  mind  than 
to  be  easily  eradicated."'  This  is  no  comparison  at  all. 
It  is  nonsense. 

218.  When  Adjectives  are  used  as  nouns,  they  must,  iu 
all  respects,  be  treated  as  nouns.  "  The  guilty,  the  inno- 
cent, the  rich,  the  poor,  ai'e  mixed  together."  But  we 
cannot  say  "  a  guilty,"  meaning  to  use  the  word  guilty  as- 
a  noun. 


140  Syntax, 

219.  If  two  or  more  Adjectives  be  used  as  applicable  to 
the  same  noun,  there  must  be  a  comma,  or  commas,  to 
separate  them ;  as,  "  a  poor,  unfortunate  man ;"  unless  and 
or  or  be  made  use  of,  for  then  the  comma  or  commas  may 
be  omitted ;  as,  "  a  lofty  and  large  and  excellent  house." 

220.  Be  rather  sparing  than  liberal  in  the  use  of  Adjec- 
tives. One  which  exj)resses  jowx  meaning  is  better  than 
two,  which  can,  at  best,  do  no  more  than  express  it,  while 
the  additional  one  may  possibly  do  harm.  But  the  error 
most  common  in  the  use  of  Adjectives  is  the  endeavoring 
to  strengthen  the  /adjective  by  putting  an  adverb  before 
it,  and  which  adverb  conveys  the  notion  that  the  quality 
or  property  expressed  by  the  Adjective  admits  of  degrees ; 
as,  "  very  honest,  extremely  just."  A  man  may  be  wiser 
than  another  wise  man ;  an  act  may  be  more  wicked  than 
another  wicked  act;  but  a  man  cannot  be  more  honest 
than  another ;  every  man  who  is  not  honest  must  be  dis- 
honest ;  a'  .d  every  act  which  is  not  just  must  be  unjust. 
"  Very  right,"  and  "  very  wrong,"  are  very  common  ex- 
pressions, but  they  are  both  incorrect.  Some  expressions 
may  be  more  common  than  others  ;  but  that  which  is  not 
right  is  wrong;  or  that  which  is  7iot  wrong  is  right. 
There  are  here  no  intermediate  degrees.  We  should  laugh 
to  hear  a  man  say,  "  You  are  a  little  right,  I  am  a  good 
deal  wrong;  that  person  is  honest  in  a  trifling  degree; 
that  act  was  too  just."  But  our  ears  are  accustomed  to 
the  adverbs  of  exaggeration.  Some  wiiters  deal  in  these 
to  a  degree  that  tues  the  ear  and  offends  the  understand- 
ing. With  them,  everything  is  excessively  or  immensely 
or  extremely  or  vastly  or  surprisingly  or  loonderfully  or 
abundantly,  or  the  like.  The  notion  of  such  writers  is 
that  these  words  give  strength  to  what  they  are  saying. 
This  is  a  great  error.  Strength  must  be  found  in  the 
thought,  or  it  will  never  be  found  in  the  words.  Big- 
sounding  words,  -without  thoughts  corresponding,  ai*e 
effort  without  effect. 


As  delating  to  Adjectives.  141 

221.  Care  must  be  taken,  too,  not  to  use  such  adjectives 
as  are  impropei'  to  be  api:)lied  to  the  nouns  along  with 
which  they  are  used.  '■'■Good  vu'tues ;  had  vices ;  painful 
tooth-aches ;   pleasing  pleasures."     These  are  stavingly 

'  absvu'd ;  but,  amongst  a  select  society  of  empty  heads, 
"  moderate  Reform  "  has  long  been  a  fashionable  expres- 
sion; an  expression  which  has  been  well  criticised  by 
asking  the  gentlemen  who  use  it  how  they  would  like  to 
obtain  moderate  justice  in  a  coiirt  of  law,  or  to  meet  with 
m,oderate  chastity  in  a  wife. 

222.  To  seciu-e  yourself  against  the  risk  of  committing 
such  errors,  you  have  only  to  take  care  to  ascertain  the 
full  meaning  of  every  word  you  employ. 

To  show  you  how  easy  our  English  is,  in  this  part  of  its  gram- 
mar, as  compared  with  other  languages,  I  shall  ask  you  to  look  at 
this  one  little  sentence:  "The  good  boy  loves  a  good  book  and  a 
good  friend;  to  good  bread  and  butter  he  gives  not  a  thought." 
Here  the  adjective  good  occurs  four  times  without  ever  once  chang- 
ing its  form ;  now  you  will  see  that  this  little  word,  iu  this  one 
little  sentence,  changes  Jive  diHerent  times  in  German :  Der  gute 
Knabe  liebt  ein  gutes  Buch  und  einen  guten  Freund  ;  gutem  Brod 
und  guter  Butter  gibt  er  keinen  Gedanken.  What  do  you  think 
of  that,  my  lad  ?  Would  you  not  think  that  the  poor  German, 
when  he  speaks,  would  be  constantly  thinking  of  his  genders, 
numbers,  and  cases?  Would  jon  not  think  he  would  be  apt  to 
get  things  mixed?  But  he  doesn't;  he  speaks  his  language  in 
correct  form,  as  naturally  as  a  canary-bird  sings  iu  correct  tune; 
for  he  has  learned  to  speak  as  the  canary  has  learned  to  sing. 

This  is  why  some  writers,  like  Mr.  Grant  White,  say  that  the 
English  language  has  no  grammar;  that  is,  because  its  words  have 
few  or  no  declensions,  or  changes  to  indicate  person,  number,  gen- 
der, case,  mood,  and  tense.  It  has,  however,  a  grammar  of  its 
own ;  and  the  proof  of  it  is  this :  Notwithstanding  the  fact  that  it 
has  so  few  declensions,  as  compared  with  German,  it  is  just  as 
hard,  if  not  harder,  for  an  adult  German  to  learn  to  speak  and 
write  English  in  a  perfectly  correct  and  idiomatic  manner,  as 
it  is  for  an  adult  American  or  Briton  to  learn  to  speak  and  write 
German  in  a  similar  manner.  Of  the  two  or  three  millions  of 
native  Germans  who  are  now  in  the  United  States,  how  many  of 


142  Syntax, 

them,  do  you  think,  are  able  to  speak  our  English  in  such  a  man. 
ner  as  to  have  their  words  taken  down  on  the  spot,  and  printed 
just  as  spoken  ?  I  do  not  think  there  are  half  a  dozen ;  I  know  of 
but  one;  and  that  is  Mr.  Carl  Schuez.  When  I  say  Tiafose  Ger- 
mans, I  mean,  of  course,  those  who,  like  him,  have  come  to  this 
country  and  learned  the  language  after  attaining  manhood.  Those 
who  come  here  in  infancy,  or  in  childhood,  become,  in  fact,  Ameri- 
cans. Of  the  others,  not  one  in  ten  thousand  ever  learns  to  speak 
like  a  native.  As  an  offset  to  Mr.  Schurz,  we  have  at  least  ono 
American  who  may  be  said  to  have  spoken  and  written  German 
as  perfectly  as  Mr.  Schurz  speaks  and  writes  English ;  and  that  is 
our  lamented  Bayard  Taylor. 

It  is  very  easy  to  learn  enough  English  to  talk  about  one's  daily 
wants ;  to  ask  for  meat  and  drink ;  to  count  money ;  to  buy  and 
sell;  and  to  inquire  one's  way;  it  is  far  easier  for  a  German  to 
learn  this  much  in  English  than  for  an  American  to  learn  as  muck 
in  German;  but  it  is,  I  think,  as  hard  for  the  German  to  master  the 
English  as  it  is  for  the  Englishman  to  master  the  German.  The  Ger- 
man language,  in  utterance  and  in  construction,  is,  like  the  people 
who  speak  it,  almost  as  regular,  formal,  and  law-conforming  as 
mathematics ;  while  our  English,  in  utterance  and  in  construction, 
is,  like  the  typical  Englishman,  though  grounded  in  law  and  prin- 
ciple, essentially  a  mass  of  peculiarities,  irregularities,  and  eccen- 
tricities. 


LETTER  XIX. 

SYNTAX,  AS  RELATING  TO  VERBS. 

223.  Let  us,  my  dear  James,  get  well  through  this  Let- 
ter; and  then  we  may,  I  think,  safely  say  that  we  know 
something  of  grammar:  a  httle  more,  I  hope,  than  is 
known  by  the  greater  part  of  those  who  call  themselves 
Latin  and  Greek  scholars,  and  who  dignify  then*  having 
studied  these  languages  with  the  name  of  '^'■Liberal  Edu- 
cation^^ 

224.  There  can  be  no  sentence,  there  can  be  no  sen«e 
in  words,  unless  there  be  a  Yerh  either  expressed  or  un- 
derstood.    Each  of  the  other  Parts  of  Speech  may  alter- 


^1^  Relating  to  Verbs.  143 

nately  be  dispensed  with ;  but  the  Verb  never  can.  The 
Verb  being,  then,  of  so  much  importance,  you  will  do  well 
to  read  again,  before  you  proceed  further,  paragraphs  23, 
24,  25,  and  26,  in  Letter  III,  and  the  whole  of  Letter 

vni. 

225.  Well,  then,  we  have  now  to  see  how  Verbs  are 
used  in  sentences,  and  how  a  misuse  of  them  affects  the 
meaning  of  the  writer.  There  must,  you  will  bear  in 
mind,  always  be  a  Verb  expressed  or  understood.  One 
would  think  that  this  was  not  the  case  in  the  dii-ection 
written  on  a  post  letter.  "To  John  Goldsmith,  Esq., 
Hambledon,  Hampshu-e."  But  what  do  these  words 
really  mean?  Why,  they  mean,  "This  letter  is  to  be 
delivered  to  John  Goldsmith,  who  is  an  Esquu-e,  who  lives 
at  Hambledon,  which  is  in  Hampshire."  Thus,  there  are 
no  less  than  five  Verbs  where  we  thought  thei-e  was  no 
Verb  at  all.  "  Sir,  I  beg  you  to  give  me  a  bit  of  bread." 
The  sentence  which  follows  the  Sir  is  complete ;  but  the 
A'jV  a2:)pears  to  stand  wholly  without  connection.  How- 
ever, the  full  meaning  is  this :  "  I  beg  you,  who  are  a  Sir, 
to  give  me  a  bit  of  bread."  "What,  John?"  That  is  to 
say,  "  What  is  said  by  you,  whose  name  is  John?"  Again, 
in  the  date  of  a  letter ;  "  Long  Island,  March  25,  1818." 
That  is :  "Z  atn  now  writing  in  Long  Island ;  this  is  the 
twenty-fifth  day  of  March,  and  this  month  is  in  the  one 
thousand  eight  hundred  and  eighteenth  year  of  the  Chris- 
tian era." 

226.  Now,  if  you  take  time  to  reflect  a  little  on  this 
matter,  you  will  never  be  puzzled  for  a  moment  by  those 
detached  words,  to  suit  which  gi-ammarians  have  invented 
vocative  cases  and  cases  absolute,  and  a  great  many  other 
appellations,  with  which  they  puzzle  themselves,  and 
confuse  and  bewilder  and  torment  those  who  read  their 
books.     (See  paragraph  191.) 

227.  We  almost  always,  whether  in  speaking  or  in  writ- 
ing, leave  out  some  of  the  words  which  are  necessary  to  a 


144  Syntax, 

full  expression  of  our  meaning.  This  leaving  out  is  called 
the  Ellipsis.  Ellipsis  is,  in  geometry,  an  oval  figui'e ;  and 
the  compasses,  in  the  tracing  of  the  line  of  this  figure, 
do  not  take  their  full  sweep  all  round,  as  in  the  tracing  of 
a  circle,  but  they  make  skips  and  lear^e  out  parts  of  the 
area,  or  surface,  which  parts  would  be  included  in  the 
circle.  Hence  it  is,  that  the  skipping  over,  or  leaving  outy 
in  speaking  or  in  writing,  is  called  the  Ellipsis ;  without 
making  use  of  which,  we,  as  you  will  presently  see, 
scarcely  ever  open  oui*  lips  or  move  our  pens.  "  He  told 
me  that  he  had  given  John  the  gun  which  the  gunsmith 
brought  the  other  night."  That  is:  "He  told  to  me  that 
he  had  given  to  John  the  gun,  which  the  gunsmith  brought 
to  this  place,  or  hither,  on  the  other  night."  This  would, 
you  see,  be  very  cumbrous  and  disagreeable ;  and,  there- 
fore, seeing  that  the  meaning  is  quite  clear  without  the 
words  marked  by  itahcs,  we  leave  these  words  out.  But 
we  may  easily  go  too  far  in  this  elliptical  way,  and  say: 
"He  told  me  he  had  given  John  the  gun  the  gunsmith 
brought  the  other  night."  This  is  leaving  the  sentence 
too  bare,  and  making  it  to  be,  if  not  nonsense,  hardly 
sense. 

228.  Reserving  some  further  remarks,  to  be  made  bj- 
and-by,  on  the  Ellipsis,  I  have  now  to  desire  that,  always, 
when  you  are  examining  a  sentence,  you  will  take  into 
your  view  the  words  that  are  left  out.  If  you  have  any 
doubt  as  to  the  correctness  of  the  sentence,  fill  it  up  by 
putting  in  the  left-out  words,  and,  if  there  be  an  error  you 
will  soon  discover  it. 

229.  Keeping  in  mind  these  remarks  on  the  subject  of 
understood  words,  you  will  now  listen  attentively  to  me, 
while  I  endeavor  to  explain  to  you  the  manner  in  which 

Verbs  ought  to  be  used  in  sentences. 

230.  The  first  thing  is  to  come  at  a  clear  understanding 
with  regard  to  the  cases  of  norms  and  pronouns  as  con- 
nected, in  use,  with  Verbs  and  prepositions  y  for  on  this 


As  Relating  to  Verbs.  145 

connection  depends  a  great  deal.  Verbs  govern,  as  it  ia 
called,  nouns  and  pronouns;  that  is  to  say,  tbey  some- 
times cause,  or  make,  nouns  or  pronouns  to  be  in  a  cer- 
tain case.  Nouns  do  not  vary  their  endings  to  denote 
different  cases ;  but  2y^onoims  do ;  as  you  have  seen  in 
Letter  VI.  Therefore,  to  illustrate  this  matter,  I  will 
take  the  pronoun  personal  of  the  thhd  person  singular, 
which  in  the  nominative  case  is  he,  possessive  case  his, 
objective  case  him. 

231.  Wlien  a  man  (it  is  the  same  with  regard  to  any 
other  person  or  thing)  is  the  actor,  or  doer,  the  ma?i  is  in 
the  nominative  case,  and  the  corresponding  pronoun  is 
he;  '■'•lie  strikes."  The  same  case  exists  when  the  man  is 
the  receiver  or  endurer,  of  an  action,  "//e  is  stricken."  It 
is  still  the  same  case  when  the  man  is  said  to  be  in  any 
state  or  condition.  "JTe  is  imhappy."  Indeed,  there  is 
no  difference  in  these  two  latter  instances;  for  "Ae  is 
stricken"  is  no  other  than  to  say  that  "he  is  in  a  state  or 
condition  called  stricken.^^  Observe,  too,  that  in  these  two 
latter  instances,  the  he  is  followed  by  the  Verb  to  be :  he 
is  stricken,  he  is  unhappy ;  and  observe,  moreover,  that 
whenever  the  Verb  to  be  is  used,  the  receiver,  or  be-er  (if 
I  may  make  a  word)  is,  and  must  be,  in  the  nominative 
case.  But  now  let  me  stop  a  little  to  guai-d  you  against 
a  puzzle.  I  say,  "  the  Verb  to  be ; "  but  I  do  not  mean 
those  two  words  always.  When  I  say  the  Verb  to  be,  I 
may  mean,  as  in  the  above  examples,  is.  This  is  the  Verb 
to  be  in  the  thuxl  person  singular.  "I  write.'"  I  should 
say  that  here  is  the  pronoun  I  and  the  Verb  to  write  ; 
that  is  to  say,  it  is  the  Verb  to  write  in  one  of  its  forms. 
The  to  is  the  sign  of  the  infinitive  mode ;  and  the  Verb  in 
that  state  is  the  root,  or  the  foundation,  from  which  all 
the  different  parts  or  forms  proceed.  Having  guarded 
ourselves  against  this  puzzler,  let  us  come  back  to  om- 
nominative  case.  The  actor,  the  doer,  the  receiver  of  an 
action,  the  be-er,  must  always  be  in  the  nominative  case ; 
7 


146  Syntctx, 

and  it  is  called  nominative  case  because  it  is  that  state,  or 
situation,  or  case,  in  which  the  person  or  thing  is  named 
without  being  pointed  out  as  the  object,  or  end,  of  any 
foregoing  action  or  purpose;  as,  "Ae  strikes;  he  is 
stricken;  he  is  unhappy."  This  word  nominative  is  not 
a  good  word;  acting  and  being  case,  would  be  much 
better.  This  word  nominative,  like  most  of  the  terms 
used  in  teaching  grammar,  has  been  taken  from  the  Latin. 
It  is  bad ;  it  is  inadequate  to  its  intended  purpose ;  but  it 
is  used ;  and  if  we  imderstand  its  meaning,  or,  rather, 
what  it  is  designed  to  mean,  its  intrinsic  insufficiency  is 
of  no  consequence.  Thus,  I  hope,  then,  that  we  know 
what  the  nominative  is.  "He  writes;  he  sings;  he  is 
sick ;  he  is  well ;  he  is  smitten ;  he  is  good ; "  and  so  on, 
always  with  a  he. 

232.  But  (and  now  pay  attention)  if  the  action  pass 
from  the  actor  to  a  person  or  thing  acted  upon,  and  if 
there  be  no  part  of  the  Verb  to  be  employed,  then  the 
person  or  thing  acted  upon  is  in  the  objective  case;  as, 
"He  smites  him;  he  strikes  him ;  he  kills  him.^  In 
these  instances  we  wish  to  show,  not  only  an  action  that 
is  performed  and  the  person  who  performs  it,  but  also  the 
person  upon  whom  it  is  performed.  Here,  therefore,  we 
state  the  actor,  the  action,  and  the  object ;  and  the  person 
or  thing  which  is  the  object,  is  in  the  objective  case.  The 
Verb  is  said,  in  such  instances,  to  govern  the  noun  or 
pronoun ;  that  is  to  say,  to  make  it,  or  force  it,  to  be  in 
the  objective  case ;  and  to  make  us  use  him  instead  of  he. 

This  is  simply  another  way  of  saying  that  the  transitive  verb 
puts  the  noun  or  pronoun  which  follows  it  in  the  objective  case, 
and  that  a  sentence  with  a  transitive  verb  must  consist  of  subject, 
predicate,  and  object;  as,  Garfield  defeated  Hancock.    (See  par.  48.) 

233.  However,  I  remember  that  I  was  very  mirch  puz- 
zled on  account  of  these  cases.  I  saw  that  when  "Peter 
was  smitten,''''  Peter  was  in  the  nominative  case  ;  but  that 
when  any  person  or  thing  '■'■had  smitten  Peter,"  Peter  was 


As  Relating  to  Verba.  147 

in  the  objective  case.  This  puzzled  me  much;  and  the 
loose  and  imperfect  definitions  of  my  grammar-book 
yielded  me  no  clue  to  a  disentanglement.  Reflection  on 
the  reason  for  this  apparent  inconsistency  soon  taught 
me,  however,  that,  in  the  first  of  these  cases,  Peter  is 
merely  named,  or  nominated  as  the  receiver  of  an  action; 
and  that,  in  the  latter  instance,  Peter  is  mentioned  as 
the  object  of  the  action  of  some  other  person  or  thing, 
expressed  or  understood.  I  perceived  that,  in  the  first 
instance,  '■'■Peter  is  smitten,"  I  had  a  complete  sense.  I 
was  informed  as  to  the  person  who  had  received  an  action, 
and  also  as  to  what  sort  of  action  he  had  received.  And 
I  perceived  that,  iai  the  second  instance,  '•'■John  has 
smitten  Peter,""  there  was  an  actor  who  took  possession  of 
the  use  of  the  Verb,  and  made  Peter  the  object  of  it ;  and 
that  this  actor,  John,  now  took  the  7iominative,  and  put 
Peter  in  the  objective  case. 

234.  This  puzzle  was,  however,  hardly  got  over  when 
another  presented  itself :  for  I  conceived  the  notion  that 
Peter  was  in  the  nominative  otdi/  because  no  actor  was 
mentioned  at  all  in  the  sentence  /  but  I  soon  discovered 
this  to  be  an  error;  for  I  found  that  "Peter  is  smitten  bi/ 
John,'^  still  left  Peter  in  the,  nomiyiative ;  and  that,  if  I 
used  the  pronoxin,  I  must  say,  "  he  is  smitten  by  John ;" 
and  not  "/i*«i  is  smitten  by  John." 

235.  Upon  this  puzzle  I  dwelt  a  long  time:  a  whole 
week,  at  least.  For  I  was  not  content  unless  I  could 
reconcile  everything  to  reason;  and  I  could  see  no  reason 
for  this.  Peter,  in  this  last  instance,  appeared  to  be  the 
object,  and  there  was  the  actor,  Jolm.  My  ear,  indeed, 
assured  me  that  it  was  right  to  say,  "//e  is  smitten  by 
John ;"  but  my  reason  doubted  the  information  and  assur- 
ances of  my  ear. 

236.  At  last,  the  little  insignificant  word  by  attracted 
my  attention.  This  word,  in  this  place,  is  a  preposition. 
Ah !  that  is  it !  prepositions  govern  nouns  and  pronoims ; 


148  Syntax, 

that  is  to  say,  make  them  to  he  in  the  objective  case !  So 
that  John,  who  had  plagued  me  so  much,  I  found  to  be  in 
the  objective  case ;  and  I  found  that,  if  I  put  him  out,  and 
put  the  pronoun  in  his  place,  I  must  say,  "  Peter  is  smit- 
ten hy  himy 

237.  Now,  then,  my  dear  James,  do  you  clearly  tmder- 
stand  this?  If  you  do  not,  have  patience.  Read  and 
think,  and  weigh  well  every  part  of  what  I  have  here 
written :  for,  as  you  will  immediately  see,  a  clear  under- 
standing with  regard  to  the  cases  is  one  of  the  main  inlets 
to  a  perfect  knowledge  of  grammar. 

As  soon  as  a  verb  is  changed  from  the  active-transitive  to  the 
passive  voice,  the  object  becomes  tlie  subject  of  the  sentence ;  as, 
" He  loves  her,"  active;  "  She  is  loved  by  him,"  passive. 

Be  careful  to  observe  the  difference  between  tlie  object  and  the 
attribute.  I  remember  I  could  not,  for  a  long  time,  see  the  differ- 
ence in  such  sentences  as  these :  "He  is  a  Jew.  She  loves  a  Jew." 
I  thought  that  "a  Jew"  was,  in  both  instances,  the  object  of  the 
verb;  but  it  is  not.  When  I  came  to  learn  German,  I  saw  the 
difference  at  once,  and  the  matter  became  clear  to  me.  Er  ist  eiu 
Jude.  Sie  liebt  einen  Juden.  You  see  that  "loves "  is  a  transitive 
verb,  whereas  "  is  "  is  a  neuter,  or  intransitive  one.  The  objective 
case  follows  a  transitive  verb,  never  a  neuter  or  intransitive  one. 
What  follows  the  neuter  verb,  therefore,  or  any  verb  naming  or 
nominating  anybody,  is  not  the  object,  not  anything  in  the  objective 
case;  but  the  attribute — so  called  because  it  generally  attributes 
something  to  somebody — and,  if  a  noun,  is  always  in  the  nomina, 
tive  case.  ^'He\s  aman;  he  is  manly ;  he  stands  a  freeman ;  ho 
remains  a  prince;  he  seems  poor;  he  appears  wealthy;  he  looks 
Tiandsame;  he  is  called  T/ie  Great  Unknown  ;  he  is  appointed  ^"m^Z^c;; 
he  is  elected  governor  " — in  all  these  cases,  what  follows  the  verb  is 
an  attribute  or  quality,  and,  wherever  it  is  a  noun,  it  is  in  the 
nominative  case.  Remember,  therefore,  that  nouns  following  such 
verbs  as  be,  become,  seem,  appear,  stand,  walk,  and  the  passive  verbs 
is  called,  is  named,  is  styled,  is  appointed,  is  elected,  is  made.,  are 
always  in  the  nominative  case,  and  are  termed  the  attribute,  or,  by 
some  grammarians,  the  complement,  of  the  sentence. 

238.  Verbs,  of  which  there  must  be  one,  at  least,  ex- 
pressed or  understood,  in  every  sentence,  must  agree  in 


As  Relating  to  Verbs.  149 

persoji  and  in  number  with  the  nouns  or  pronoxins  which 
:ire  the  nominatwes  of  the  sentence ;  that  is  to  say,  the 
Verbs  must  be  of  the  same  person  and  same  number  as 
the  nominatives  are.  Verbs  frequently  change  their  forms 
and  endings  to  make  themselves  agree  with  the  nomina- 
tives. How  necessary  it  is,  then,  to  know  what  is,  and 
what  is  not,  a  nominative  in  a  sentence !  Let  us  take  an 
example.  "John  smite  Peter."  What  are  these  words ? 
John  is  a  noun,  third  person,  singular  number,  nomina- 
tive case.  Sjnite  is  a  Verb,  Jirst  person,  singular  number. 
Peter  is  a  noun,  thu'd  person,  singular  number,  objective 
case.  Therefore,  the  sentence  is  incorrect;  for  the  nomi- 
native, John,  is  in  the  third  person,  and  the  Verb  is  ia 
the  Jirst ;  while  both  ought  to  be  in  the  same  person. 
The  sentence  ought  to  be,  "  John  smites  Peter ;"  and  not 
"  John  smite  Peter." 

239.  This  is,  to  be  sure,  a  very  glaring  eiTor;  but  stil 
it  is  no  more  than  an  eiTor,  and  is,  in  fact,  as  excusable 
as  any  other  grammatical  error.  "The  men  lives  in  the 
country."  Here  the  Verb  lives  is  in  the  singular  number, 
and  the  noun  men,  which  is  the  nominative,  is  in  the 
plural  number.  "  The  men  live  in  the  covmtry,"  it  ought 
to  be.  These  errors  stare  vis  in  the  face.  But  when  the 
sentences  become  longer,  and  embrace  several  nominatives 
and  Verbs,  we  do  not  so  readily  perceive  the  errors  that 
are  committed.  "  The  intention  of  the  act  of  Parliament, 
and  not  its  several  penalties,  decide  the  character  of  the 
corrupt  assembly  by  whom  it  was  passed."  Here  the 
noun,  penalties  comes  so  near  to  the  Verb  decide  that  the 
ear  deceives  the  judgment.  But  the  noun  iiitention  is 
the  nominative  to  the  Verb,  which  therefore  ought  to  be 
decides.  Let  us  take  a  sentence  still  more  deceiving. 
"  Without  the  aid  of  a  fraudulent  paper-money,  the  tyrants 
never  could  have  performed  any  of  those  deeds  by  which 
their  safety  have  been  endangered,  and  which  have,  at  the 
same  time,  made  them  detested."     Deeds  is  the  nominu- 


150  Syntaae, 

tive  to  the  last  have  and  its  principal  Verb ;  but  safety  is 
the  nominative  to  the  first  have;  and  therefore  this  first 
have  ought  to  have  been  has.  You  see  that  the  error 
arises  from  our  having  the  plural  noun  deeds  in  our  eye 
and  ear.  Take  all  the  rest  of  the  sentence  away,  and 
leave  '■'■safety  have  been"  standing  by  itself,  and  then  the 
error  is  as  flagrant  as  '■'■John  smite  Peter T  Watch  me 
iiovr,  in  the  next  sentence.  "  It  must  be  observed  that 
land  fell  greatly  in  price  as  soon  as  the  cheats  began  to 
draw  in  their  paper-money.  In  such  cases  the  quantity 
and  quality  of  the  land  is  the  same  as  it  was  before ;  but 
the  price  is  reduced  all  of  a  sudden,  by  a  change  in  the 
value  and  power  of  the  money,  which  becomes  very  dif- 
fei'ent  from  what  it  was."  Here  are  two  complete  sen- 
tences, which  go  very  ghbly  off  the  tongue.  There  is 
nothing  in  them  that  offends  the  eai*.  The  first  is,  indeed, 
correct ;  but  the  last  is  a  mass  of  error.  Quantity  and 
quality.,  Which  are  the  nominatives  in  the  first  member  of 
the  sentence,  make,  together,  a  plural.,  and  should  have 
been  followed,  after  the  word  land.,  by  are  and  not  by  is; 
and  the  it  was,  which  followed,  should,  of  coui'se,  have 
been  they  were.  In  the  second  member  of  the  sentence, 
value  and  power  are  the  nominatives  of  becomes,  which, 
therefore,  should  have  been  become;  and  then,  again, 
there  follows  an  it  was,  instead  of  they  were.  We  are 
misled,  in  such  cases,  by  the  nearness  of  the  singular 
noun,  which  comes  in  between  the  nominatives  and  the 
Verbs.  We  should  not  be  likely  to  say,  "  Quantity  and 
quahty  is;  value  and  power  becomes.''''  But  when  a  sin- 
gular novm  comes  in  between  such  nominatives  and  the 
Verbs,  we  are  very  apt  to  be  thinking  of  that  noun,  and 
to  commit  error.  When  we  once  begin,  we  keep  On; 
and  if  the  sentence  be  long,  we  get  together,  at  last,  a 
fine  collection  of  Verbs  and  pronouns,  making  as  complete 
nonsense  as  heart  can  wish.  Judge  Blackstone,  in  the 
4th  Book,  Chapter  33,  says,  "  The  very  scheme  and  model 


As  Melating  to  Verbs.  151 

of  the  admixdstration  of  common  justice,  between  party 
and  party,  icas  entii'ely  settled  by  this  king ;  and  has  con- 
tinued neai'ly  the  same  to  this  day."  Administration  of 
common  justice  was  full  upon  the  judge's  ear ;  down  he 
clapped  was  /  and  has  natvu-ally  followed ;  and  thus,  my 
dear  son,  in  gi'ammai'  as  in  moral  conduct,  one  fault 
almost  necessai'ily  produces  others. 

240.  Look,  therefore,  at  your  nominative,  before  you 
put  a  Verb  upon  paper ;  for,  you  see,  it  may  be  one  loord, 
or  Uco  or  more  words.  But  observe,  if  there  be  two  or 
more  singulai'  nouns  or  pronouns,  sepaiated  by  or,  which, 
you  know,  is  a  disjoining  conjunction;  then,  the  Verb 
must  be  in  the  singular ;  as,  "A  soldiei',  or  a  sailor,  who 
has  served  his  country  faithfully,  is  fau-ly  entitled  to  n. 
pension ;  but  who  will  say  that  a  j)rostituted  peer,  a  jjimp, 
or  a  buffoon,  merits  a  similar  provision  from  the  pubHc?" 

241.  It  sometimes  happens  that  there  jue,  in  the  nomi- 
native, two  or  more  novms,  or  pronouns,  and  that  they 
are  in  different  numbers^  or  iu  different  persons  ;  as,  "  The 
minister  or  the  borough-tyrants!'^  These  nouns  cannot 
have  the  Verb  to  agree  Avith  them  both.  Therefore  if  it 
be  the  conspiring  of  these  wretches  against  the  liberties 
of  the  people,  of  which  we  have  to  speak,  we  cannot  say, 
"The  minister  or  the  borough- tyrants  conspire ;  "  because 
the  Verb  would  not  then  agree  in  number  with  the  norm 
minister/  nor  can  we  say  cons2)ires /  because  the  Verb 
would  not  agree  with  the  noun  borough-tyrants.  There- 
fore, we  must  not  write  such  sentences;  we  must  say, 
"The  minister  conspires,  or  the  borough-tyrants  co7ispire, 
against  the  liberties  of  the  people."  Repetition  is  some- 
times disagreeable  to  the  ear ;  but  it  is  better  to  rej^eat, 
be  it  ever  so  often,  than  to  wiite  bad  grammar,  which  is 
only  another  term  for  nonsense. 

242.  When  nominatives  are  sepai'ated  by  nor,  the  rule 
of  or  must  be  followed.  "  Neither  man  ncr  beast  is  safe 
in  such  weather ; "  and  not  are  safe.     And  if  nominatives 


152  Syntax, 

of  different  nvunbers  present  themselves,  we  must  not  give 
them  a  Verb  which  disagrees  with  either  the  one  or  the 
other.  "We  must  not  say:  "Neither  the  halter  nor  the 
bayonets  are  sufficient  to  prevent  us  from  obtaining  oui* 
rights."  We  must  avoid  this  bad  grammar  by  using  a 
different  form  of  words;  as,  "We  are  to  be  prevented 
from  obtaining  our  rights  by  neither  the  halter  nor  the 
bayonets."  And  why  should  we  wish  to  wiite  bad  gram- 
mar, if  we  can  express  oui'  meaning  in  good  grammar? 

243.  If  or  or  nor  disjoin  nouns  and  pronoims  of  different 
persons,  these  nouns  and  pronouns,  though  they  be  all  of 
the  same  number,  cannot  be  the  nominative  of  one  and 
the  same  Verb.  We  cannot  say,  "They  or  I  am  in  fault; 
I,  or  they,  or  he,  is  the  author  of  it ;  George  or  I  a'tn  the 
person."  ]VIi-.  Lindley  Mun-ay  says  that  we  may  use 
these  phrases ;  and  that  we  have  only  to  take  care  that 
the  Verb  agrees  with  that  person  which  is  placed  nearest 
to  it ;  but  he  says,  also,  that  it  would  be  better  to  avoid 
euch  phrases  by  giving  a  different  turn  to  our  words. 
I  do  2iot  like  to  leave  anything  to  chance  or  to  discretion 
when  we  have  a  cleai'  principle  for  otu*  guide.  Fill  up  the 
sentences,  and  you  will  see  what  pretty  work  there  is. 
"  They  am  in  fault,  or  I  am  in  fault ;  I  is  the  author,  or 
they  is  the  author,  or  he  is  the  author;  George  am,  the 
person,  or  I  aw*  the  person."  Mi".  Murray  gives  a  similai' 
latitude  as  to  the  Verbs  used  with  a  mixture  of  plurals 
and  singulars,  as  mentioned  in  the  foregoing  paragraph. 
The  truth,  I  suspect,  is,  that  Mx.  Murray,  observing  that 
great  writers  frequently  committed  these  errors,  thought 
it  pmdent  to  give  up  the  cause  of  grammar',  rather  than 
seem  to  set  himself  against  such  formidable  authoiity. 
But  if  we  follow  this  course,  it  is  pretty  clear  that  we 
shall  very  soon  be  left  with  no  principle  and  no  rule  of 
grammar. 

The  grammarians  declare  that  you  may  say,  ' '  Eithei  he  or  I  am 
the  guilty  one;"  or,  "He  is  the  guilty  one,  or  I  am;"  "You  or 


As  Melatiny  to  Verbs.  153 

William  is  to  go;"  or,  "You  are  to  go,  or  William  is."  The  eye 
or  the  ear  often  decides  which  is  best.  "You  must  not  tell  us 
what  you  or  anybody  else  thinks"  seems  more  compact  than  "  You 
must  not  tell  us  what  3^0 w  think,  or  what  anybody  else  tliinks."  If 
one  of  the  nominatives  be  negatively  used,  the  verb  must  be  in  the 
singular.  Thus,  "He,  and  not  I,  is  chosen;"  "I,  and  not  they, 
am  to  go."  These  are,  indeed,  correct ;  and  yet  I  think  it  is  better 
to  say,  lie  is  chosen,  and  not  I;  I  am  to  go,  and  not  the}-.  I  beg 
you  to  DOtice  how  frequently  and  nicely  Cobbett  uses  the  subjunc- 
tive be  after  if  and  thovyh,  which  is  correct,  and  wliich  now, 
unfortunately,  is  falling  out  of  use  among  common  writers. 

244.  The  nominative  is  frequently  a  noun  of  multitude  ; 
as,  mob,  parliament,  gang.  Now,  where  this  is  the  case, 
the  Verb  is  used  in  the  singulai'  or  in  the  plui-al,  upon 
precisely  the  same  principles  that  the  pronouns  are  so 
used ;  and  as  these  piinciples,  together  with  ample  illus- 
trations by  the  way  of  example,  have  been  given  you  in 
Letter  XVII,  paragraph  181,  I  need  say  nothing  more  of 
the  matter.  I  will  just  observe,  however,  that  consistency, 
in  the  use  of  the  Verb,  in  such  cases,  is  the  main  thing  to 
keep  in  view.  We  may  say,  "The  gang  of  borough- 
tyrants  is  cruel ', "  or,  "  that  the  gang  of  borough-tyrants 
are  cruel ; "  but  if  we  go  on  to  speak  of  their  notoriously 
brutal  ignorance,  we  must  not  say,  "  The  gang  of  borough- 
tyiants  is  cruel,  and  are  also  notoriously  as  ignorant  as 
brutes."  We  must  use  is  in  both  places,  or  are  in  both 
places. 

245.  In  lookmg  for  the  nominative  of  a  sentence,  take 
care  that  the  relative  pronoun  be  not  a  stumbling-block, 
for  relatives  have  no  changes  to  denote  number  or  person; 
and  though  they  may  sometimes  appear  to  be  of  them- 
selves nominatives,  they  never  can  be  such.  "  The  men 
who  are  here,  the  man  who  is  here ;  the  cocks  that  crow, 
the  cock  that  croios^  Now,  if  the  relative  be  the  nomi- 
native, why  do  the  Verbs  change,  seeing  that  here  is  no 
change  in  the  relative  f  No :  the  Verb,  in  pursuit  of  its 
nominative,  runs  through  the  relatives  to  come  at  then* 

7* 


154  Syntax, 

antecedents,  men,  man,  cocJcs,  cock.  Bishop  Lowtli  says, 
however,  that  "the  relative  is  the  nominative  when  no 
other  nominative  comes  between  it  and  the  Verb ; "  and 
2Hr.  Miuray  has  very  faithfully  copied  this  erroneous 
observation.  '■'■Who  is  in  the  house?  ^Vho  are  in  the 
house?  Who  strikes  the  ii'on?  Who  strike  the  iron? 
Who  was  in  the  street  ?  Who  were  in  the  street  ?  "  Now, 
here  is,  in  all  these  instances,  no  other  nominative  between 
the  relative  and  the  Verb ;  and  yet  the  Verb  is  continually 
varying.  Why  does  it  vary?  Because  it  disregards  the 
relative  and  goes  and  finds  the  antecedent,  and  accommo- 
dates its  number  to  that  antecedent.  The  antecedents 
are,  in  these  mstances,  understood :  "  "WTiat  person  is  in 
the  house  ?  What  2)erso7is  are  in  the  house  ?  What  person 
strikes  the  iron?  What  persons  strike  the  iron?  What 
persbti  \oas  in  the  street?  What  persons  were  in  the 
street  ?  "  The  Bishop  seems  to  have  had  a  misgiving  in 
his  mind,  when  he  gave  this  account  of  the  nominative 
functions  of  the  relative ;  for  he  adds,  "the  relative  is  of 
the  satne  persoii  as  the  antecedent ;  and  the  Verb  agrees 
wii/i  i<  accoi-dingly."'  Oh!  oh!  but  the  relative  is  a/^oays 
the  same,  and  is  of  any  and  of  every  numher  and  joerso/i. 
How  then  can  the  Verb,  when  it  makes  its  changes  in 
number  and  person,  be  said  to  agree  with  the  relative? 
Disagree,  indeed,  with  the  relative  the  Verb  cannot  any 
like  the  preposition,  no  changes  to  denote  number  ;  but 
the  danger  is  that  in  certain  instances  the  relative  may  be 
danger  is  that  in  certain  instances  the  relative  may  be 
taken  for  a  nominative,  without  yom'  looking  after  the 
antecedent,  which  is  the  real  nominative,  and  that  thus, 
not  having  the  number  and  person  of  the  antecedent 
clearly  in  your  mind,  you  may  give  to  the  Verb  a  wi*ong 
number  or  person.  It  is  very  seldom  that  those  who 
lay  down  erroneous  rules  fin'nish  us  with  examples  by 
the  means  of  which  we  ai'e  enabled  to  detect  the  error  of 
these  rules;   yet,  Mr.  Mttrray  has,  in  the  present  case, 


As  Melating  to  Verbs.  155 

done  this  most  amply.  For  in  another  pait  of  his  book 
he  has  these  two  examples :  "  I  am  the  general  who  give 
the  orders  to-day.  I  am  the  general  who  gives  the  orders 
to-day."  Here  the  antecedent  as  well  as  the  relative  are 
precisely  the  same ;  the  order  of  the  words  is  the  same ; 
and  yet  the  words  ai'e  different.  Why?  Because,  in  the 
first  example,  the  pronoun  I  is  the  nominative,  and  in  the 
second,  the  noun  general.  The  first  means,  "  7",  who  am 
the  general  here,  gii^e  the  orders  to-day."  The  second 
means,  "The  general  who  gives  the  orders  to-day  is  I." 
Nothing  can  more  clearly  show  that  the  relative  cannot 
be  the  nominative,  and  that  to  consider  it  as  a  nominative 
must  lead  to  error  and  confusion.  You  will  observe, 
therefore,  that  when  I,  in  the  Etymology  and  Syntax  as 
relating  to  relative  pronouns,  speak  of  relatives  as  being 
in  the  nominative  case,  I  mean  that  they  relate  to  nouns 
or  to  persofial  pro7iouns  which  are  in  that  case.  The 
same  observation  ajDplies  to  the  other  cases. 

I  am  strougly  iacliued  to  thiuk  that  Cobbett  is  iu  error  here. 
The  relative  pronoun  must  have  person,  number,  gender,  and  case, 
like  any  other  pronoun;  and  who  is  undoubtedly  always  of  the 
came  person  and  number  as  the  word  to  which  it  relates.  Let  us 
put  it  directly  after  all  the  three  persons,  singular  and  plural : 

It  is  I  who  speak,  or  It  is  I  who  am  speaking. 

It  is  thou  who  speakest,  "  It  is  thou  who  art  speaking. 
It  13  he  who  speaks,  "  It  is  he  who  is  speaking. 

It  is  we  who  speak,  ''  It  is  we  who  are  speaking. 

It  is  you  who  speak,  "  It  is  you  who  are  speaking. 

It  is  they  who  speak,        "  It  is  they  who  are  speaking. 

Now  here  each  who  is  of  the  same  person  as  the  pronoun  or  word 
to  which  it  relates,  and  consequently  the  verb  agrees  with  it. 
Strangely  enough,  the  relative  pronoun  may,  as  Cobbett  says,  be 
of  any  person;  but  that  does  not  prevent  it  from  agreeing  with  its 
antecedent.  I  used  to  think  that  who  was  always  of  the  third 
person,  referring  always  to  somebody  spoken  of;  but  now  I  see 
that  it  may  be  of  the  first  person,  referring  to  somebody  who  is 
Bpeaking.  Nevertheless,  we  do  sometimes  hear,  It  is  I  who  speaks 
German;    it  is  you  who  speaks  Spanish;    it  is  you  that  speaks 


156  Syntax, 

French.  This  may  be  explained  by  supposing  that  the  full  meaning 
of  the  words  is :  It  is  I  who  am  the  person  that  speaks  German ; 
it  is  you  who  are  the  person  that  speaks  Spanish.  And  here  again 
each  who  is  of  the  same  person  as  the  antecedent. 

246.  "We  are  sometimes  embarrassed  tc  fix  precisely  on 
the  nominative,  when  a  sort  of  addition  is  made  to  it  by 
words  expressing  persons  or  things  that  accompany  it ; 
AS,  "  The  Tyrant,  with  the  Spy,  have  brought  Peter  to  the 
block."  We  hesitate  to  determine  whether  the  Tyrant 
alone  is  in  the  nominative,  or  whether  the  nominative 
includes  the  Spy;  and  of  coui-se  we  hesitate  which  to 
employ,  the  singular  or  the  plural  Verb ;  that  is  to  say, 
has  or  have.  The  meaning  must  be  our  guide.  If  we 
mean  that  the  act  has  been  done  by  the  Tyi-ant  himself, 
and  that  the  Spy  has  been  a  mere  involuntary  agent,  then 
we  ought  to  use  the  singulai* ;  but  if  we  believe  that  the 
Spy  has  been  a  co-operator;  an  associate;  an  accomplice; 
then  we  must  use  the  j)lural  of  the  Verb.  "The  Tyi-ant 
with  his  Proclamation  has  produced  great  oppression 
and  flagrant  violations  of  law."  Has,  by  all  means,  in 
this  case ;  because  the  proclamation  is  a  mere  instrument. 
Oive  the  sentence  a  turn:  "The  Tyi'ant  has  produced 
great  oppression  and  flagi'ant  violations  of  the  law  with 
his  proclamation."  This  is  good;  but  "the  Tyrant  has 
brought  Peter  to  the  block  with  the  Spy,"  is  bad;  it 
sounds  badly ;  and  it  is  bad  sense.  It  does  not  say  what 
we  mean  it  should  say.  "A  leg  of  mutton,  with  turnips 
find  caiTots,  is  very  good."  If  we  mean  to  say  that  a  leg 
of  mutton  when  cooked  with  these  vegetables,  is  good, 
we  must  use  is ;  but  if  we  be  siDeaking  of  the  goodness 
of  a  leg  of  mutton  and  these  vegetables  taken  together, 
we  must  use  are.  When  with  means  along  with,  together 
with,  in  company  with,  and  the  like,  it  is  nearly  the  same 
as  and;  and  then  the  pltn-al  Verb  must  be  used.  "ZTe, 
with  his  bare  hand,  takes  up  hot  ii'on."  Not,  "he,  with 
his   bare   hand,  take  up."     "He,  with  his  brothers,  are 


^6'  Relating  t<>   Verbs.  167 

able  to  do  much."  Not,  ''Hs  able  to  do  much."  If  the 
J  ronoun  be  used  instead  of  brothers,  it  will  be  in  the 
objective  case:  "He,  with  them,  are  able  to  do  much." 
But  this  is  no  impediment  to  the  including  of  the  noun 
(represented  by  them)  in  the  nominative.  With,  which 
is  a  preposition,  takes  the  objective  case  after  it;  but  if 
the  persons  or  things  represented  by  the  words  coming 
after  the  preposition  form  pait  of  the  actors  in  a  sen- 
tence, the  understood  nouns  make  part  of  the  nominatives. 
"  The  bag,  with  the  guineas  and  dollars  in  it,  were  stolen." 
For  if  we  say  was  stolen,  it  is  jyossible  for  us  to  mean 
that  the  hag  only  was  stolen.  "Sobriety,  with  great 
industry  and  talent,  enable  a  man  to  perform  great 
deeds."  And  not  enables ;  for  sobriety  alone  would  not 
enable  a  man  to  do  great  things.  "  The  borough-tyi'anny, 
Viith  the  paper-money  makers,  have  produced  misery  and 
starvation."  And  not  has  •  for  we  mean  that  the  two 
\iduNQ co-operated.  "Zeal,  with  discretion,  do  much;"  and 
not,  does  much ;  for  we  mean,  on  the  contrary,  that  it 
does  nothing.  It  is  the  meaning  that  must  determine 
which  of  the  numbers  we  ought,  in  all  such  cases,  to 
employ. 

The  grammarians  are  now  unanimous  in  declaring  that  a  phrase 
beginning  witli  the  preposition  with,  coming  directly  after  tlie 
subject,  does  not  affect  tlie  verb,  or  predicate ;  as,  The  vessel,  with 
her  crew,  was  lost;  the  regiment,  with  its  officers,  x^as  captured; 
the  house,  with  its  contents,  lias  been  sold;  the  minister,  with  his 
cabinet,  has  resigned;  the  emperor,  with  his  family,  has  been 
assassinated;  Cobbett,  with  his  Grammar,  lias  done  much  good. 
Therefore,  it  is  correct  to  say,  The  tyrant,  with  the  spy,  has 
brought  Peter  to  the  block;  he,  with  his  brothers,  has  done  much; 
the  bag,  with  the  guineas  and  dollars  in  it,  Avas  stolen;  zeal,  with 
discretion,  does  much.  Because,  in  these  instances,  "with  the 
spy"  and  "with  his  brothers"  indicate,  like  the  plirase  xoith  his 
proclamation,  merely  instruments  ;  and  the  sentence  about  the  bag 
of  money  means  simply  that  the  bag  was  stolen  with  what  it 
contained.  The  sentence  aljout  sobriety  means  that  this  virtue, 
employed  or  combined  with  other  qualities,  enables  a   man  to 


168  Syntax, 

perform  great  deeds ;  and  that  about  zeal  with  discretion  must  be 
regarded  in  the  same  way.  Besides,  the  preposition  with  puts  the 
spy  and  the  brothers,  the  guineas  and  the  dollars,  the  industry  ami 
the  talent,  in  the  objective  case;  and  how  can  any  thing  in  the 
objective  case  be  the  subject,  which  is  always  in  the  nominative  case  ? 
What  Cobbett  says  about  the  sentence,  "He,  with  his  brothers, 
are  able  to  do  much,"  is  about  as  good  an  example  of  sophistry  as 
any  thing  I  know.  For  an  expression  of  this  kind,  see  Cobbett's 
account  of  the  sand-hill  as  an  educator.  Life,  page  261. 

The  same  is  the  case  with  sentences  in  which  the  phrase  as  well  as 
occurs.  Clay,  as  well  as  Webster,  was  a  great  orator;  Charles,  as 
well  as  his  brother,  was  successful  in  business ;  the  father,  as  well 
as  his  son,  is  in  fault ;  the  minutest  insect,  as  well  as  the  largest 
quadruped,  deinves  its  life  from  the  same  Omnipotent  Source. 

247.  The  Verb  to  he  sometimes  comes  between  two 
nouns  of  different  numbers.  "The  great  evil  is  the 
borough- debt."  In  this  sentence  there  is  nothing  to 
embarrass  us ;  because  evil  and  borough-debt  are  both  in 
the  singula!'.  But,  "the  great  evil  is  the  taxes,'"'  is  not  so 
clear  of  embarrassment.  The  embaiTassment  is  the  same, 
when  there  is  a  singular  noun  on  one  side,  and  two  oi' 
more  singulais  or  plm^als  on  the  other  side;  as,  "The 
ciuse  of  the  country  is  the  profligacy,  the  rapacity,  the 
corruption  of  the  law-makers,  the  base  subserviency  of 
the  administrators  of  the  law,  and  the  frauds  of  the 
makers  of  paper-money.'  Now,  we  mean,  here,  that  these 
things  constitute,  ox  form,  or  make  up,  a  curse.  We  mean 
that  the  ciu'se  consists  of  these  things;  and  if  we  said 
this,  there  would  be  no  puzzling.  "The  evil  is  the  taxes." 
That  is,  the  taxes  constitute  the  evil ;  but  we  cannot  say, 
"the  evil  are  the  taxes ; "  nor  can  we  say,  that  the  "curse 
are  these  things."  Avoid,  then,  the  use  of  the  Verb  to  be 
in  all  such  cases.  Say,  the  cui'se  of  the  country  consists 
of,  or  aiises  from^  or  is  produced  by.  Dr.  Blaik,  in  his 
19th  Lecture,  says:  "A  feeble,  a  harsh,  or  an  obscure 
style,  are  always  faults.''''  The  or  required  the  singulai* 
Verb  is ;  but  faults  required  are.  If  he  had  put  is  and 
faulty,  there  would  have  been  no  doubt   of   his   being 


As  Relating  to  Verbs.  15J> 

correct.  But  as  tLe  sentence  now  stands,  there  ia  great 
room  for  doubt,  and,  that,  too,  as  to  more  than  one  point ; 
for  fault  means  defect,  and  a  style,  which  is  a  whole^ 
cannot  well  be  called  a  defect,  which  mean  a  want  of  good- 
ness in  a  parL  Feebleness,  harshness,  obscurity,  are 
faulty.  But  to  call  the  style  itself,  to  call  the  whole  thing 
n.  fault,  is  more  than  the  Doctor  meant.  The  style  may 
be  faulty,  and  yet  it  may  not  be  a  fault.  The  Doctor's 
Avork  is  faulty;  but,  surely,  the  work  is  not  a. fault! 

248.  Lest  you  should  be,  in  certain  instances,  puzzled 
to  find  your  nominative  case,  which,  as  you  now  see,  con- 
stitutes the  main  spring  and  regulator  of  every  sentence, 
1  wiU  here  point  out  to  you  some  instances  wherein  there 
is  used,  apparently,  neither  Verb  nor  nominative,  "/n 
general  I  dislike  to  drink  wine."  This  in  general  is  no 
more,  in  fact,  than  one  word.  It  means  generally.  But 
sometimes  there  is  a  Verb  comes  in :  "generally  speaking." 
Thus:  "The  borough- tyrants,  generally  si^eaking,  are 
great  fools  as  well  as  rogues."  That  is  to  say,  "when  we 
sjjeak  generally;"  oi*,  "if  'x'e  are  speaking  generally;"  or, 
"when men  or  j^eople  sjeak  generally."  For  observe  that 
there  never  can  he  a  sentence  without  a  Verb,  expressed 
or  understood,  and  that  there  never  can  he  a  Verb  without 
ft  nominative  case,  expressed  or  understood. 

249.  Sometimes  not  only  two  or  more  nouns,  or  pro- 
nouns, may  be  the  nominative  of  a  sentence,  but  many 
other  words  along  with  them  may  assist  in  making  a 
nominative ;  as,  "  Pitt,  Bose,  Steele,  and  their  associates, 
giving  to  Walter  a  sum  of  the  pubHc  money,  as  a  reward 
for  Hbelling  the  sons  of  the  king,  toas  extremely  profligate 
and  base."  That  is  to  say,  this  act  of  Pitt  and  his  asso- 
ciates was  extremely  profligate  and  base.  It  is,  when  you 
come  to  inquire,  the  act  which  is  the  nominative,  and  all 
the  other  words  only  go  to  describe  the  origin  and  end  of 
the  act. 


160  ISryiitax^ 

I  doubt  very  much  whether  this  sentence  be  correct.  FoUowing^ 
Cobbett's  own  instructions,  let  us  shorten  the  sentence,  and  see 
how  it  will  look  then:  "  Pitt  giving  Walter  a  sum  of  money  was 
extremely  base."  I  think  this  neither  looks  nor  sounds  correct. 
It  was  hh  act,  PiWa  act,  which  was  base ;  and  therefore  it  should 
be,  "Pitt's  giving  Walter  a  sum  of  money  was  extremely  base;" 
that  is  to  say,  Pitt's  acting  was  base ;  for  we  cannot  say,  Pitt  act 
ing  was  base.  We  say,  "Bacon's  drawing  up  charges  against 
Essex  was  extremely  base;  John  Chinaman's  working  for  low 
wages  is  the  head  and  front  of  his  offense ;"  and  not.  Bacon  draw- 
ing up,  etc. — By-the-bye,  such  sentences  as,  "The  great  evil  is 
the  taxes,"  are  perfectly  correct;  for  the  subject  is  "the  evil," 
which  is  singular,  and  it  makes  little  matter  wliat  the  attribute 
may  be,  for  it  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  verb.  It  is  precisely  the 
same  form  of  expression  which  we  use  when  we  say.  It  is  we;  it 
is  you ;  it  is  they  ;  it  is  the  boys;  it  is  the  rich;  it  is  the  wicked; 
it  is  the  Italians ;  and  so  on. 

250.  You  must  take  care  that  tbere  be  a  nominative, 
and  that  it  be  cleai'ly  expressed  or  vuiderstood.  "The 
Attorney-General  Gibbs,  whose  malignity  induced  him  to 
be  extremely  violent,  and  was  listened  to  by  the  Judges." 
The  fiist  Verb  induced  has  a  nominative,  namely,  the 
malignity  of  the  Attorney-General  Gibbs;  but  the  was 
has  no  nominative,  either  expressed  or  clearly  understood ; 
and  we  cannot,  therefore,  tell  what  or  who  it  was  that 
was  Hstened  to ;  whether  the  malignity  of  Gibbs,  or  Gihos 
himself.  It  should  have  been,  and  v:ho,  or,  and  he,  wfvS 
listened  to ;  and  then  we  should  have  known  that  it  was 
Gibbs  himself  that  was  listened  to.  The  omitting  of  the 
nominative,  five  hundred  instances  of  which  I  could  di'aw 
from  Judge  Blackstone  and  Doctor  Johnson,  aiises  very 
often  from  a  desii-e  to  avoid  a  repetition  of  the  noun  or 
pi-onouns ;  but  repetition  is  always  to  be  prefeiTcd  before 
obscuiity. 

251.  Now,  my  dear  James,  I  hope  that  I  have  explained 
to  you,  sufficiently,  not  only  what  the  nominative  is,  but 
what  aie  its  powers  in  every  sentence,  and  that  I  have 
imprinted  deeply  on  your  mind  the  necessity  of  keeping 


As  JRelating  to  Verbs.  161 

the  nominative  constantly  in  your  eye.  For  want  of  doing 
this.  Judge  Blackstone  has,  in  Book  IV,  Chap.  17,  com- 
mitted some  most  ludicrous  errors.  "  Our  ancient  Saxon 
laws  nominally  punished  theft  with  death,  if  above  the 
value  of  twelve-pence ;  but  the  criminal  was  permitted  to 
redeem  his  hfe  by  a  pecuniaiy  ransom ;  as  among  their 
German  ancestors."'  What  confusion  is  here?  "Whose 
ancestors  ?  Theirs.  Who  are  they  f  Why  the  criminal. 
Theirs.,  if  it  retate  to  anything,  must  relate  to  laws ,'  and 
then  the  laivs  have  ancestors.  Then,  v^hat  is  it  that  was 
to  be  of  above  the  value  of  twelve-pence  ?  The  death,  or 
the  theft?  By,  ^'^  if  above  the  value  of  twelve-pence,"  the 
Judge,  without  doubt,  meant,  "?y  the  thing  stolen  were 
above  the  value  of  twelve-pence;"  but  he  says  no  such 
thing ;  and  the  meaning  of  the  words  is,  if  the  death  were 
above  the  value  of  twelve-pence.  The  sentence  should 
have  stood  thus:  "Our  ancient  Saxon  laws  nominally 
punished  theft  with  death,  if  the  thing  stolen  were  above 
the  value  of  twelve-pence;  but  the  criminals  were  per- 
mitted to  redeem  their  Hves  by  a  pecuniary  ransom ;  as 
among  their  German  ancestors."  I  could  quote,  from  the 
same  author,  hundreds  of  examples  of  similar  errors ;  but 
were  there  only  this  one  to  be  found  in  a  work  which  is 
composed  of  matter  which  was  read,  in  the  way  of  Lec- 
tures, by  a  professor  of  law,  to  students  in  the  University 
of  Oxford,  even  this  one  ought  to  be  sufficient  to  convince 
you  of  the  importance  of  attending  to  the  precepts  which 
I  have  given  you  relative  to  this  part  of  oui'  subject. 

252.  As  to  the  objective  case,  it  has  nothing  to  do  with 
Verbs ;  because  a  noun  which  is  not  in  the  nominative 

must  be  in  the  objective ;  and  because  Verbs  do  never 
vai'y  then-  endings  to  make  themselves  agree  with  the 
objective.  This  case  has  been  sufficiently  explained  under 
the  head  of  personal  pronouns,  which  have  endings  to 
denote  it. 

253.  The  possessive  case,  likewise,  has  nothing  to  do 


162  Syntax, 

"with  Verbs,  only  jou  must  take  care  that  you  do  not,  in 
any  instance,  look  upon  it  as  a  nominative.  "  The  quality 
of  the  apples  were  good."  No ;  it  must  be  was  ;  for  qual- 
ity is  the  nominative  and  apples  the  possessive.  "The 
vv^ant  of  learning,  talent,  and  sense  are  more  ^dsible  in 
the  two  houses  of  Parliament  than  in  any  other  jDart  of 
the  nation."  Take  care  upon  all  such  occasions.  Such 
sentences  are,  as  to  grammatical  construction,  very  deceiv- 
ing. It  should  be  "  is  more  visible ;"  for  want  is  the  nomi- 
native ;  and  learning,  talent,  and  sense  are  in  the  posses- 
sive.    The  want  of  learning,  and  so  on. 

254.  You  now  know  all  about  the  person  and  7iuniber 
of  Verbs.  You  know  the  reasons  upon  which  are  founded 
their  variations  with  regard  to  these  two  circumstances. 
Look,  now,  at  the  conjugation  in  Letter  VIII,  paragraph 
98;  and  you  will  see  that  there  remain  the  Times  and 
Modes  to  be  considered. 

255.  Of  2'imes  there  is  very  little  to  be  said  here.  All 
the  fanciful  distinctions  of  perfect  present,  more  past,  and 
'tnore  perfect  jxist,  and  numerous  others,  only  tend  to 
bewilder,  confuse,  and  disgust  the  learner.  There  can 
be  but  three  times,  the  present,  the  past,  the  future/  and, 
for  the  expressing  of  these,  our  language  provides  us 
with  words  and  terminations  the  most  suitable  that  can 
possibly  be  conceived.  In  some  languages,  which  contain 
no  little  words  such  as  oui'  signs,  will,  shall,  may,  and  so 
on,  the  Verbs  themselves  change  then-  form  in  order  to 
express  what  we  express  by  the  help  of  these  signs. 
In  French,  for  instance,  there  are  two  past  times.  I  will 
give  you  an  example  in  order  to  explain  this  matter. 
"  The  working  men,  every  day,  gave  money  to  the  tyrants, 
who,  in  retui'n,  gave  the  working  men  dungeons  and 
axes."  Now  here  is  our  word  gave,  which  is  the  past 
time  of  the  Verb  to  give.  It  is  the  same  word,  you  see, 
in  both  instances;  but  you  will  see  it  different  in  the 
French.     "Tous   les    jours,   les    ouvriers   donnaient  de 


As  Relating  to  Verbs.  163 

I'aigent  aux  tyrauts,  qui,  en  retour,  donnerent  aux  ouvriers 
des  cachots  et  des  liaclies."  You  see  that,  in  one  place, 
our  give  is  translated  by  donjiaie/it,  and  in  the  other 
place,  by  donnerent.  One  of  these  is  called,  in  French, 
the  past  imperfect,  and  the  other  the  past  perfect.  This 
distinction  is  necessary  in  the  French;  but  similar  dis- 
tinctions are  wholly  unnecessary  in  English. 

256.  In  the  Latin  language,  the  Verbs  change  their 
endings  so  as  to  include  in  the  Verbs  themselves  what  we 
express  by  our  auxihary  Verb  to  have.  And  they  have 
as  many  changes,  or  different  endings,  as  are  requii'ed  to 
express  all  those  various  circumstances  of  time  which  we 
express  by  work,  worked,  shall  work,  may  icork,  might 
work,  have  loorked,  had  worked,  shall  have  worked,  m,ay 
have  worked,  might  have  worked,  and  so  on.  It  is,  there- 
fore, necessary  for  the  Latins  to  have  distinct  appellations 
to  suit  these  various  ch'cumstances  of  time,  or  states  of 
an  action ;  but  such  distinction  of  appellations  can  be  of 
no  use  to  us,  whose  Verbs  never  vary  their  endings  to 
express  time,  except  the  single  variation  from  the  present 
to  the  past ;  for,  even  as  to  the  future,  the  signs  answer 
our  pmpose.  In  om'  compound  times,  that  is  to  say,  such 
as  1  have  worked,  there  is  the  Verb  to  have,  which  be- 
comes had,  or  shall  have,  and  so  on. 

257.  Why,  then,  shoiild  we  perplex  ourselves  with  a 
multitude  of  ai'tificial  distinctions,  which  cannot,  by  any 
possibility,  be  of  any  use  in  practice  !  These  distinctions 
have  been  introduced  from  this  cause:  those  who  have 
written  English  Grammars  have  been  taught  Latin ;  and 
cither  unable  to  divest  themselves  of  their  Latin  rules,  or 
unwilling  to  treat  with  simplicity  that  which,  if  made 
somewhat  of  a  mystery,  would  make  them  appear  more 
learned  than  the  mass  of  people,  they  have  endeavored  to 
make  our  simple  language  turn  and  twist  itself  so  as 
to  become  as  complex  in  its  piinciples  as  the  Latin  lan- 
guage is. 


164  Syntax, 

258.  There  are,  however,  some  few  remarks  to  be  made 
with  regard  to  the  times  of  Verbs ;  but  before  I  make 
them,  I  must  speak  of  the  participles.  Just  cast  your  eye 
again  on  Letter  VIII,  paragraphs  97  and  102.  Look  at 
the  conjugations  of  the  Verbs  to  work,  to  have,  and  to  be, 
in  that  same  Letter.  These  participles,  you  see,  with  the 
help  of  to  have  and  to  be,  form  our  compound  titnes.  I 
need  not  tell  you  that  /  was  working  means  the  same  as 
I  worked,  only  that  the  former  supposes  that  sometliing 
else  was  going  on  at  the  same  time,  or  that  something 
happened  at  the  time  I  was  working,  or  that,  at  least, 
there  is  some  circumstance  of  action  or  of  existence  col- 
lateral with  my  workiny ;  as,  "I  was  working  lohen  he 
came;  I ivas  sick  while  I  was  working;  it  rained  while 
I  was  working ;  she  scolded  while  I  was  working."  I  need 
not  tell  you  the  use  of  do  and  did/  I  need  not  say  that 
J  do  work  is  the  same  as  J  work,  only  the  former  ex- 
presses the  action  more  positively,  and  adds  some  de- 
gree of  force  to  the  assertion ;  and  that  did  work  is  the 
same  as  worked,  only  the  former  is,  in  the  past  time,  of 
the  same  use  as  do  is  in  the  present.  I  need  not  dwell 
here  on  the  uses  of  icill,  shall,  may,  might,  should,  would, 
can,  could,  and  must;  which  vises,  various  as  they  arc, 
are  as  well  known  to  us  all  as  the  uses  of  oiu-  teeth  and 
our  noses ;  and  to  misapply  which  words  argues  not  only  a 
deficiency  in  the  reasoning  faculties,  but  also  a  deficiency 
in  instinctive  discrimination.  I  will  not,  my  dear  James, 
in  imitation  of  the  learned  doctors,  jDester  you  with  a 
philological  examination  into  the  origin  and  properties  of 
words,  with  regard  to  the  use  of  which,  if  you  were  to 
commit  an  error  in  conversation,  your  brother  Richard, 
who  is  four  years  old,  would  instantly  put  you  right.  Of 
all  these  little  words  I  have  said  quite  enough  before; 
but  when  the  Verbs  to  have  and  to  be  are  used  as  auxili- 
aries to  principal  Verbs,  and,  especially,  when  the  sen- 
tences are  long,  errors  of  great  consequence  may  be  com- 


As  Helating  to  Verbs.  165 

mitted ;  and,  therefore,  against  these  it  will  be  proper  to 
guard  you. 

And  yet,  here  in  the  United  States,  there  is  no  more  common 
error  than  the  confounding  of  shall  and  will.  If  you  can  stick  the 
following  rule  fast  in  your  mind,  it  will  save  you  from  making 
many  mistakes  in  the  use  of  these  words : — I  sJiall,  you  icill,  he  will, 
are  the  forms  of  the  future,  and  merely  fohetell  what  will  take 
place ;  /  will,  you  shall,  he  shall,  arc  the  forms  of  the  potential, 
and  express  will  or  determination  on  the  part  of  the  speaker. 
The  latter  are  equal  to  the  German  ich  will,  du  sollst,  er  soil. 
Now  try  to  repeat  this  rule  without  looking  at  the  book.  Turn  it 
over  in  your  mind,  and  try  it  in  sentences  of  your  own  formatior.. 
In  addressing  other  people,  politeness  often  requires  will  instead  of 
shall ;  as,  "  You  will  mark  the  packages  1,  2,  3  ; "  not  "  You  shall," 
which  would  be  equal  to  a  command. 

An  English  nobleman,  SirE.  W.  Head,  has  written  a  whole  book 
on  these  two  mighty  little  words,  "  Shall  and  Will,"  from  which  the 
following  "admirable  statement  of  the  true  distinction  between 
these  auxiliaries"*  is  taken 

"  Will  in  the  first  person  expresses  a  resolution  or  a  promise:  ^  I 
will  not  go '  =  it  is  my  resolution  not  to  go.  *  I  will  give  it  you '  = 
I  promise  to  give  it  you.  Will  in  the  second  Tparson  foretells :  *If 
you  come  at  six  o'clock,  you  will  find  me  at  home.'  Will  in  the 
second  person,  in  questions,  anticipates  a  wish  or  an  intention: 
Will  you  go  to-morrow?'  =  Is  it  your  wish  or  intention  to  go 
to-morrow  V  Will  in  the  third  person  foretells,  generally  implying 
an  intention  at  the  same  time,  when  the  nominative  is  a  rational 
creature ;  '  He  will  come  to-morrow,'  signifies  what  is  to  take  place, 
and  that  it  is  the  intention  of  the  person  mentioned  to  come.  '  I 
think  it  will  snow  to-day,'  intimates  what  is,  probably,  to  take 
place.  Will  must  never  be  used  in  questions  with  nominative  cases 
of  the  first  person :  'Will  we  come  to-morrow?'  =  Is  it  our  inten- 
tion or  desire  to  come  to-morrow  f  which  is  an  absurd  question.  We 
must  say.  Shall  wc  come  to-morrow? 

"  Would  is  subject  to  the  same  rules  as  ipill.  Would  followed  by 
that  is  frequently  used  (the  nominative  being  expressed  or  under- 
stood) to  express  a  wish:  '  Would  that  he  had  died  before  this  dis- 
grace befell  him  I'  =  I  wish  that  he  had  died  before  this  disgrace  befell 
him.  Would  have,  followed  by  an  infinitive,  signifies  a  desire  to  do 
or  to  make  ;  '  I  would  have  you  think  of  these  things '  =  /  ioish  to 
make  you  think  of  tliese  things.     Would  is  often  used  to  express  a 

♦A.  S.  Hill's  Rhetoric,  in  which  I  found  the  above  rule  and  this  quotation. 


166  iS'i/ntaXj 

custom:  'He  would  often  talk  about  these  things'  =  'It  was  his 
custom  to  talk  of  these  things. 

"Shall  in  the  first  -person  f&retells,  simply  expressing  wAai  is  to 
take  place:  'I  shall  go  to-morrow.'  Notice  that  no  intention  or 
desire  is  expressed  by  shall.  Shall,  in  the  first  person,  in  questions, 
asks  permission :  '  Shall  I  read  ?'  =  Do  you  wish  me,  or  will  you  per- 
mit me  to  read?  Shall  in  the  second  and  third  persons  expresses 
a  promise,  a  command,  or  a  threat:  'You  shall  have  these  books 
to-morrow'  =  /  promise  to  let  you  have  these  books  to-morrow. 
'  Thou  shalt  not  steal '  —  /  command  thee  not  to  steal.  '  He  shall 
he  punished  for  this'  =  /  threaten  to  punish  him  for  this  offense. 

'^  SJiould  is  subject  to  the  same  rules  as  shall.  Should  frequently 
expresses  duty:  '  You  should  not  do  so '  =  It  is  your  duty  not  to  do 
no.  Should  often  signifies  a  plan:  '  1  should  not  do  so '  =  It  would 
not  be  my  plan  to  do  so.  Should  often  expresses  supposition: 
'  Should  they  not  agree  to  the  proposals,  what  must  I  do  ?'  =  Sup- 
pose  that  it  happen  that  they  will  not  agree  to  the  proposals." 

If  you  wish  any  more  on  this  Head,  read  any  play  of  Shake- 
speare's, and  take  down  every  sentence  with  will  or  sliall,  would  or 
should,  and  learn  them  by  heart.  Mr.  White,  speaking  of  this  very 
matter,  says  admirably,  "The  best  way  is,  to  give  yourself  no 
trouble  at  all  about  your  grammar.  Read  the  best  authors,  con- 
verse with  the  best  speak(;rs,  and  know  what  you  mean  to  say, 
and  you  will  speak  and  write  good  English,  and  may  let  grammar 
go  to  its  own  place!"  Jacob  said  to  the  angel,  "I  will  not  let  thee 
go  till  thou  hast  blessed  me."  You  would  say  to  your  servant,  "I 
shall  let  you  go  if  you  do  your  duty."  Consider  the  difference  in 
meaning  between  these  two. 

259.  Ti7ne  is  so  plain  a  matter ;  it  must  be  so  well 
known  to  us,  whetlier  it  be  the  2^>"esent,  the  jDas^,  or  the 
future.,  that  we  mean  to  express,  that  we  shall  hai'dly 
say,  "  We  loork,''''  when  we  are  speaking  of  our  having 
worked  last  year.  But  you  have  seen  in  Letter  XVI, 
pai'agraph  171  (look  at  it  again),  that  Doctor  Blair  could 
make  a  mistake  in  describing  the  time  of  an  action. 
Doctor  Blair  makes  use  of  "it  had  been  better  omitted." 
Meaning  that  it  would  have  been  better  to  omit  it.  This 
is  a  sheer  vulgarism,  like,  "I  had  as  lief  be  killed  as 
enslaved."  Which  ought  to  be,  "I  tcowZr?  as  lief."  But 
the  most  common  error  is  the  using  of  the  Verb  to  have 


As  Melating  to    Verbs.  1«)7 

with  the  passive  participle,  when  the  past  time,  simpl}-, 
or  the  injinitive  of  the  Verb  ought  to  be  used.  "  ]\L-. 
Speaker,  I  expected  from  the  former  language  and  posi- 
tive promises  of  the  Noble  Lord  and  the  Right  Honorable 
the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  to  have  seen  the  Bank 
paying  in  gold  and  silver."  This  is  House-of-Commons 
language.  Avoid  it  as  you  would  avoid  all  the  rest  of 
theu"  doings.  I  expected  to  see,  to  be  sure,  and  not  have 
seen,  because  the  have  seen  carries  your  act  of  seeing/ 
back  beyo7id  the  period  within  which  it  is  supposed  to 
have  been  expected  to  take  place.  "  I  expected  to  have 
ploughed  my  land  last  Monday''  That  is  to  say,  "  I  last 
Monday  was  in  the  act  of  expecting  to  have  ploughed 
my  land  before  that  day''  But  this  is  not  what  the 
writer  means.  He  means  to  say  that,  last  Monday,  or 
before  that  day,  he  was  in  the  act  of  expecting  to  plough 
his  land  on  that  day.  "  I  called  on  him  and  wished  t<> 
have  submitted  my  manuscript  to  him."  Five  hundi'ed 
such  errors  are  to  be  found  in  Dr.  Goldsmith's  works. 
"I  wished,  then  and  there,  to  subtnit  my  manuscript  to 
him."  I  wished  to  do  something  there,  and  did  not  then 
wish  that  I  had  done  something  before. 

260.  When  you  use  the  active  participle,  take  care  that 
the  ti77ies  be  attended  to,  and  that  you  do  not,  by  misap- 
plication, make  confusion  and  nonsense.  "  I  had  not  the 
pleasure  of  hearing  his  sentiments  when  I  verote  that 
letter."  It  should  be  of  having  heard  /  because  the  hear- 
i7ig  must  be  suj)posed  to  ha,veheen  wanted  previous  to 
the  act  of  writing.  This  word  wanted,  and  the  word 
wanting,  are  fi'equently  misused.  "  All  that  was  zoanting 
was  honesty."  It  should  be  xoanted.  "  The  Bank  is 
weighed  in  the  balance,  and  found  wanting,"  and  not 
wanted.  Found  to  be  wanting,  or  in  want;  in  want  of 
money  to  pay  its  notes. 

261.  I  will  not  fatigue  youi*  memory  with  more  examples 
relating  to  the  times  of  Verbs.     Consider  well  what  you 


168  '  Syntax^ 

mean ;  what  you  wish  to  say.  Examine  well  into  the 
true  meaning  of  your  words,  and  you  will  never  make  a 
mistake  as  to  the  times.  "7"  thought  to  have  heard  the 
Noble  Lord  produce  something  like  proof."  No!  my 
dear  James  will  never  fall  into  the  use  of  such  senseless 
gabble!  You  would  think  of  hearing  something;  you 
would  expect  to  hear,  not  to  have  heard.  You  would  be 
waiting  to  hear,  and  not,  like  these  men,  be  waiting  to 
have  heard.  "/  should  have  liked  to  have  been  informed 
of  the  amount  of  the  Exchequer  Bills."  A  phraseology 
like  this  can  be  becoming  only  in  those  Houses  where  it 
was  proposed  to  relieve  the  distresses  of  the  nation  by 
setting  the  laborers  to  dig  holes  one  day  and  fill  them 
up  the  next. 

262.  It  is  erroneous  to  confound  the^-^s^  time  with  the 
passive  participle  of  the  Verb.  But  noAv,  before  I  speak 
of  this  very  common  error,  let  us  see  a  little  more  about 
the  participles.  You  have  seen,  in  Letter  VIII,  what  the 
participles  are ;  you  have  seen  that  tcorking  is  the  active 
participle,  and  icorked  the  passive  participle.  We  shall 
speak  fully  of  the  active  by-and-by.  The  passive  parti- 
ciple and  the  Verb  to  be,  or  some  pai't  of  that  Verb,  make 
what  is  called  the  passive  Verb.  This  is  not  a  Verb  which, 
in  its  origiii,  differs  from  an  active  Verb,  in  like  manner 
as  a  neuter  Verb  differs  from  an  active  Verb.  To  sleep  is 
neuter  in  its  origin,  and  must,  in  all  its  parts,  be  neuter ; 
but  every  active  Verb  may  become  a  passive  Verb.  The 
passive  Verb  is,  in  fact,  that  state  of  an  active  Verb  which 
expresses,  as  we  have  seen  above,  the  action  as  being 
received  or  endured;  and  it  is  called  passive  because  the 
receiver  or  endurer  of  the  action  is  passive;  that  is  to  say, 
does  nothing.  "John  smites;  John  is  smitten.'''  Thus, 
then,  the  passive  Verb  is  no  other  than  the  passive  parti- 
ciple used  along  with  some  part  of  the  Verb  to  be. 

263.  Now,  then,  let  us  see  a  specimen  of  the  errors  of 
which  I  spoke  at  the  beginning  of  the  last  pai'agTaph. 


As  Helating  to  Verbs.  169 

When  the  Verb  is  regular^  there  can  be  no  eiTor  of  this 
sort ;  because  the  past  time  and  the  passive  participle  are 
wiitten  in  the  same  manner;  as,  "John  xoorked ;  John  is 
worked ^  But,  when  the  Verb  is  irregular^  and  when  the 
past  time  and  the  passive  participle  are  written  in  a 
manner  different  from  each  other,  there  is  room  for  error, 
and  error  is  often  committed:  "John  smote;  John  is 
smote.'"  Tliis  is  gross.  It  offends  the  ear;  but  when  a 
company,  consisting  of  men  who  have  been  enabled,  by 
the  favor  of  the  late  William  Pitt,  to  plunder  and  insult 
the  people,  meet  under  the  name  of  a  Pitt  Club,  to  cele- 
brate the  birthday  of  that  corrupt  and  cruel  minister, 
those  who  publish  accounts  of  their  festivities  always  tell 
us,  that  such  and  such  toasts  were  drank;  instead  of 
drunk.  I  drank  at  my  dinner  to-day ;  but  the  milk  and 
water  which  I  drank,  were  drunk  by  me.  In  the  lists  of 
Inegular  Verbs,  in  Letter  VIII,  the  differences  between 
the  past  times  and  the  passive  pai'ticiples  are  all  clearly 
shown.  You  often  hear  people  say,  and  see  them  write, 
"We  have  spoke;  it  urns  spoke  in  my  heai'ing;"  but  "we 
have  came;  it  'was  did,''  are  just  as  correct. 

It  may  be  well  to  notice  that  most  of  tliese  verbs,  like  tlie  German 
verbs  from  whicii  they  are  derived,  change  the  i  to  a  in  the  past 
tense,  and  to  u  in  the  past  participle.  Say,  therefore,  I  sing,  sang, 
have  sung;  I  spring,  sprang,  have  sprung;  I  ring,  rang,  have 
rung;  1  swim,  swam,  have  swum;  1  sink,  sank,  have  sunk;  and 
so  on.  But  there  are  a  few  exceptions;  as,  to  fling,  to  cling,  to 
v.'i  ing,  to  sting,  whicli  change  the  i  to  u  in  both  the  past  tense  and 
the  past  participle. 

264.  Done  is  the  passive  pai'ticiple  of  to  do,  and  it  is 
■very  often  misused.  This  done  is  frequently  a  very  great 
offender  against  grammar.  To  do  is  the  act  of  doing. 
We  often  see  people  write,  "I  did  not  speak,  yesterday, 
so  well  as  I  wished  to  have  done.""  Now,  what  is  meant 
by  the  writer?  He  means  to  say  that  he  did  not  speak 
so  well  as  he  then  vnshed,  or  was  wishing,  to  speak. 
8 


170  Syntax, 

Therefore,  the  sentence  should  be,  "I  did  not  speak  yes- 
terday so  well  as  I  wished  to  do.'"  That  is  to  say,  'so 
well  as  I  wished  to  do  it;"  that  is  to  say,  to  do,  or  to 
perform,  the  act  of  speaking. 

265.  Take  great  care  not  to  be  too  free  in  your  use  of 
the  Verb  to  do  in  any  of  its  times  or  modes.  It  is  a  nice 
little  handy  word,  and,  like  our  oppressed  it,  it  is  made 
use  of  very  often  when  the  writer  is  at  a  loss  for  what  to 
put  down.  To  do  is  to  act,  and,  therefore,  it  never  can, 
in  any  of  its  parts,  supply  the  place  of  a  neuter  Verb. 
Yet,  to  employ  it  for  this  pui-pose  is  very  common.  Dr. 
Blair,  in  his  23rd  Lecture,  says :  "  It  is  somewhat  unfor- 
tunate that  this  Number  of  the  Spectator  did  not  ejid,  as 
it  might  very  well  have  done,  with  the  former  beautiful 
period."  That  is  to  say,  "done  t7."  And,  then,  we  ask: 
done  what?  Not  the  act  of  ending ;  because,  in  this 
case,  there  is  7io  actio7i  at  all.  The  Verb  means  to  come 
to  an  end/  to  cease/  not  to  go  any  further.  This  same 
Verb  to  end,  is,  sometimes,  an  active  Verb:  "I  e)id  my 
sentence ; "  and  then  the  Verb  to  do  may  supply  its  place ; 
as,  "I  have  not  ended  my  sentence  so  well  as  I  might 
have  done/  "  that  is,  done  it/  that  is,  done,  or  performed, 
the  act  of  endhig.  But  the  Number  of  the  Spectator  was 
no  actor/  it  was  expected  to  perform  nothing ;  it  was,  by 
the  Doctor,  wished  to  have  ceased  to  proceed.  "  Did  not 
end  as  it  very  well  might  have  ended.  .  .  ."  This  would 
have  been  correct ;  but  the  Doctor  wished  to  avoid  the 
repetitiofi,  and  thus  he  fell  into  bad  grammar.  "IVIr. 
Speaker,  I  do  not  feel  so  well  satisfied  as  I  should  have 
done,  if  the  Right  Honorable  gentleman  had  explained 
the  matter  more  fully."  Tou  constantly  hear  talk  hke 
this  amongst  those  whom  the  boroughs  make  law-givers- 
To  feel  satisfied  is,  when  the  satisfaction  is  to  arise  from 
conviction  produced  by  fact  or  reasoning,  a  senseless  ex- 
pression ;  and  to  supply  its  place,  when  it  is,  as  in  this 
case,  a  neuter  Verb,  by  to  do,  is  as  senseless.    Done  what  / 


As  Relating  to  Verbs.  171 

Done  the  act  of  feeling  !  "  I  do  not  feel  so  well  satisfied 
as  I  should  have  done^  or  executed.,  or  performed  the  act 
of  feeling!"'  What  incomprehensible  words!  Very  be- 
.  coming  in  the  creatures  of  coiTuption,  but  ridiculous  in 
any  other  persons  in  the  world. 

266.  But  do  not  misunderstand  me.  Do  not  confound 
do  and  did.^  as  parts  of  a  principal  Verb,  with  the  same 
words,  as  parts  of  an  auxiliary.  Read  again  Letter  VIII, 
paragraph  111.  Do  and  did.,  as  helpers,  are  used  with 
neuter  as  well  as  with  active  Verbs;  for  here  it  is  not 
their  business  to  supply  the  place  of  other  Verbs,  but 
merely  to  add  strength  to  affirmations  and  negations,  or 
to  mark  time ;  as,  "  The  sentence  does  end;  I  do  feel  easy." 
But  done,  which  is  the  passive  participle  of  the  active 
Verb  to  do,  can  never  be  used  as  an  auxiliaiy.  The  want 
of  making  this  distinction  has  led  to  the  very  common 
error  of  which  I  spoke  in  the  last  paragraph,  and  against 
which  I  am  very  desirous  to  guard  you. 

267.  In  sentences  which  are  negative  or  interrogative, 
do  and  did  express  time ;  as,  "You  do  not  sleep ;  did 
you  JxoifeelT''  But  they  do  not  here  supply  the  place  of 
other  Verbs;  they  merely  help;  and  their  assistance  is 
useful  only  as  to  the  circumstance  of  time ;  for  we  may 
say,  "  You  sleep  not ;  felt  you  not"?"  And  if  in  answer  to 
this  question,  I  say,  "I  did,'"'  the  word/l'e^  is  understood; 
''IdidfeeV 

You  will  sometimes  hear  even  Wall-street  millionaires  say,  "  I 
done  it ;  he  seen  him ;  he  is  dead  broke ;"  which  is  confounding  the 
past  participle  and  the  past  tense.  You  mustsa3%  I  did  it;  I  saw 
him ;  he  is  dead  broken ;  or,  rather,  completely  ruined.  But  hen; 
is  a  very  important  matter;  something  which  Cobbett  doe.n 
not  touch ;  something  of  prime  importance.  What  is  the  differ- 
ence between  "  1  did  it"  and  "  I  have  done  it?"  between  "  I  was 
in  New  Y'ork"  and  "I  have  been  in  NewY'ork?"  between  "1 
wrote  the  letter"  and  "  I  have  written  the  letter?"  When  do  you 
use  the  one  and  when  the  other?  Think  for  a  moment.  Give 
your  own  explanation  before  reading  mine.     These  two  forms  are 


172  Syntax, 

termed  the  past  tense  and  the  present  perfect  tense.  Those  who 
are  "native  and  to  the  manner  born"  seldom  confound  these 
tenses,  but  foreigners  constantly  do.  The  distinction  between 
them,  however,  is  exceedingly  plain.  We  use  the  past  tense  when 
speaking  of  anything  that  has  happened  in  a  completely  past  tvne; 
as,  I  did  it  yesterday;  I  was  in  New  York  last  week ;  I  wrote  a 
letter  last  Thursday.  We  use  the  present  perfect  tense  when 
speaking  of  anything  that  has  happened  in  a  time  not  yet  entirely 
past,  or  in  an  indefinite  past  time:  I  have  done  it  to-day;  I  have 
been  in  New  York  this  week ;  I  have  written  many  letters ;  I  have 
been  in  Paris.  Both  the  Germans  and  the  French  can,  in  their 
languages,  use  either  form  for  the  same  time;  so  that  they  can 
say,  which  we  cannot,  "I  have  been  in  New  York  yesterday:  I 
have  written  a  letter  last  week." 

The  past  perfect,  /  had  done,  I  had  written,  I  had  been,  is  used 
when  speaking  of  something  happening  at  a  time  farther  back 
than  or  anterior  to  a  given  past  time.  For  instance :  While  I  am 
telling  you  of  what  happened  to  me  in  18G8  in  London,  and  of  my 
doing  something  there  at  that  time,  and  of  my  writing  a  letter  to 
somebody  in  that  year,  I  suddenly  inform  you,  for  the  better 
understanding  of  my  narrative,  that  I  had  been  in  London  before 
that  year;  that  I  had  done  something  there  before  that  time,  and 
that  I  had  written  to  somebody  before  writing  at  that  time.  This, 
3'ou  see,  is  past  perfect  time ;  it  is  going  behind  the  past  time  of 
our  narrative ;  and  it  is  called  the  perfectly  past  time. 

268.  "Well,  then,  I  think,  that  as  far  as  relates  to  the 
active  Verb,  the  passive  Verb,  and  the  passive  participle, 
enough  has  now  been  said.  You  have  seen,  too,  some- 
thing of  the  difference  between  the  functions  of  the  active 
Verb  and  those  of  the  neuter;  but  there  are  a  few  remarks 
to  be  made  with  regard  to  the  latter.  A  neuter  Verb 
cannot  have  a  noun  or  a  pronoun  in  the  objective  case 
immediately  after  it;  for  though  we  say,  "I  dream  a 
dream,''''  it  is  understood  that  my  mind  has  been  engaged 
in  a  dream.  "  I  live  a  good  life,'''  means  that  I  am  living 
in  a  good  manner.  "  I  walk  my  horse  about,"  means  that 
I  lead  or  conduct  my  horse  in  the  pace  called  a  walk. 
Nor  can  a  neuter  Verb  become  2^assive/  because  a  passive 
Verb  is  no  other  than  a  Vei-b  describing  an  action  received 


As  Relating  to  Verbs.  173 

or  endured.  "The  iioble  earl,  on  retiu-ning  to  town, 
found  that  the  noble  countess  was  eloped  with  his  grace." 
I  read  this  very  sentence  in  an  English  newspaper  not 
long  ago.  It  should  be  had  eloped;  for  toas  eloped  means 
that  somebody  had  eloped  the  countess;  it  means  that  she 
had  received  or  endured.,  from  some  actor,  the  act  of  elop- 
ing., whereas,  she  is  the  actress,  and  the  act  is  confined  to 
herself.  The  Verb  is  called  neuter  because  the  action 
does  not  pass  over  to  anything.  There  are  Verbs  which 
are  inactive;  such  as,  to  sit,  to  sleejy,  to  exist.  These  are 
also  neuter  Verbs,  of  coui'se.  But  inactivity  is  not  neces- 
sary to  the  making  of  a  Verb  neuter.  It  is  sufficient  for 
this  purpose  that  the  action  do  not  pass  from  the  actor  to 
any  object. 

These  inactive  verbs  are  the  real  neuter  ones ;  for,  in  the  use  of 
them,  the  nominative  is  neither  acting  nor  acted  on.  But  we  now 
set  down  the  whole  batch,  neuter  and  intransitive,  as  intransitive 
verbs;  and  Cobbett  simply  shows,  by  this  verb  to  elope,  that  we 
cannot  use  an  intransitive  verb  in  the  passive  voice ;  we  can  no 
more  say  I  am  eloped  than  we  can  say  I  am  sitted,  lam  slept,  or  / 
am  existed.  There  are  a  few  intransitive  verbs  that  seem  an  excep- 
tion to  this  rule ;  but  they  are  not.  I  mean  the  verbs  to  come,  to 
arnve,  to  go,  to  return,  to  fall,  to  rise,  and  some  others.  Let  me 
set  tliem  down  in  the  two  ways  in  which  they  are  used : 

He  has  come,  He  is  come. 

He  has  arrived,  He  is  arrived. 

He  has  gone,  He  is  gone. 

He  has  returned.  He  is  returned. 

He  has  fallen,  He  is  fallen. 

He  has  risen,  He  is  risen. 

In  the  second  form,  He  is  come,  etc.,  the  words  come,  arrived,  gone, 
returned,  fallen,  risen,  are  not  really  participles,  but  adjectives, 
indicating  state.;  so  this  form  is  not  at  all  a  passive  form  of  the 
verb;  it  is  simply  neuter;  for  the  subject  is  neither  acting  nor 
acted  on.  In  the  first  form.  He  has  come,  etc.,  these  words  are 
participles,  and  the  sentences  indicate  action  completed.  But  I 
find  I  am  anticipating;  Cobbett  says  the  same  thing  in  the  next 
paragraph  but  one.     Just  keep  in  mind  that  what  he  calls  neuter 


174  Syntax, 

we  now  call  intransitive;  and  that  what  he  calls  active,  we  now 
call  transitive. 

269.  In  the  instance  just  mentioned,  the  error  is  fla- 
grant: '■'■was  eloped,^''  is  what  few  persons  would  put 
down  in  writing ;  yet  anybody  might  do  it  upon  the  au- 
thority of  Dr.  Johnson;  for  he  says  in  his  Dictionary 
that  to  elope  is  an  active  Verb,  though  he  says  that  it  iu 
synonymous  with  to  run  away,  which,  in  the  same  Dic- 
tionary, he  says,  is  a  neuter  Verb.  However,  let  those 
who  prefer  Doctor  Johnson's  authority  to  the  dictates 
of  reason  and  common  sense  say  that  "  his  grace  eloped 
the  countess;  and  that,  accordingly,  the  countess  was 
eloped." 

270.  The  danger  of  error,  ia  cases  of  this  kind,  arises 
from  the  circumstance  of  there  being  many  Verbs  which 
are  active  in  one  sense  and  neuter  in  another.     The  Verb 
to  endure,  for  instance,  when  it  means  to  support,  to  sus- 
tain, is  active;  as,  "I  endure  pain.'"     But  when  it  means 
to  last,  to  continue,  it  is  neuter ;  as,  "  The  earth  endures 
from  age  to  age."    In  the  first  sense  we  can  say,  the  paiu 
is  endured;  but,  in  the  last,  we  cannot  say  the  earth  is 
endured  from  age  to  age.     We  say,  indeed,  I  am  fallen; 
the  colt  is  grown,  the  trees  are  rotten,  the  stone  is  crum- 
bled, the  post  is  mouldered,  the  pitcher  is  cracked;  though 
to  grow,  to  rot,  to  crumble,  to  moulder,  to  crack,  are  all 
of  them  neuter  Verbs.     But  it  is  clearly  understood  here 
that  we  mean  that  the  colt  is  in  a  grown,  or  augmented 
state;  that  the  trees  are  in  a  rotten  state;  and  so  on; 
and  it  is  equally  clear  that  we  could  not  mean  that  the 
countess  was  in  an  eloped  state.     "  The  noble  earl  found 
that   the  countess  was  gone."     This  is  correct,  though 
to  go  is  a  neuter  Verb.     But  gone,  in  this  sense,  is  not 
the  participle  of  the  Verb  to  go;  it  is  merely  an  adjective, 
meaning  absent.    If  we  put  any  word  after  it,  which  gives 
it  a  verbal  signification,  it  becomes  eiToneous.    "  He  fovmd 
that  the  countess  loas  gone  out  of  the  house."'     That  is  to 


As  Relathifj  to  Verh.^.  175 

say,  was  absent  out  of  the  house;  and  thi^  is  iiousense. 
It  must,  in  this  case  be,  "He  found  that  the  countess 
had  gone  out  of  the  housed 

271.  Much  more  might  be  said  upon  this  part  of  my 
subject;  many  niceties  might  be  stated  and  discussed; 
but  I  have  said  quite  enough  on  it  to  answer  every  useful 
])ui-pose.  Here,  as  everywhere  else,  take  time  to  think. 
There  is  a  reason  for  the  right  use  of  every  word.  Have 
your  meaning  clear  in  yoiu*  mind ;  know  the  meaning  of 
all  the  words  you  employ :  and  then  you  will  seldom  com- 
mit eiTors. 

272.  There  remains  to  be  noticed  the  use  of  the  active 
participle,  and  then  we  shall  have  a  few,  and  only  a  few, 
words  to  say  upon  the  subject  of  the  modes  of  Verbs. 
As  to  the  active  participle,  paragraph  97,  in  Letter  VIII, 
will  have  told  you  nearly  all  that  is  necessary.  We  know 
well  that  I  am  working  means  that  /  loork,  and  so  on. 
There  is  great  nicety  in  distinguishing  the  cu'cumstancea 
which  call  for  the  use  of  the  one  from  those  which  call 
for  the  other :  but,  Hke  many  other  things,  though  very 
difficult  to  explain  by  words,  these  cu'cumstances  are  per- 
fectly well  understood,  and  scrupulously  attended  to,  by 
even  the  most  illiterate  persons.  The  active  participle  is, 
you  know,  sometimes  a  nou7i  in  its  functions ;  as,  "  Work- 
ing is  good  for  oui-  health."  Here  it  is  the  nominative 
case  to  the  Verb  is.  Sometimes  it  is  an  adjective;  as, 
^'■ih.Q  working  people."  As  a  nomi  it  maybe  in  any  of 
the  three  cases ;  as,  "  Working  is  good ;  the  advantage  of 
working;  I  like  working.''''  It  may  be  in  the  singular  or 
in  the  plural :  " The  work'ing  of  the  mines ;  the  workings 
of  corruption."  Of  course  it  requites  articles  and  j)repo- 
sitions  as  nouns  require  them.  More  need  not  be  said 
about  it ;  and,  indeed,  my  chief  pnrpose  in  mentioning  the 
active  pai'ticiple  in  this  place  is  to  remind  you  that  it  may 
bo  a  nominative  case  in  a  sentence. 

273.  The  modes  have  boen  explained  in  Letter  Vm, 


176  Syntax, 

paragraphs  92,  93,  94,  95,  and  96.  Read  those  pai-agraphs 
again.  The  injinitive  mode  has,  in  almost  all  respects, 
the  power  of  a  noun.  '■'■To  work  is  good  for  our  health." 
Here  it  is  the  nominative  of  the  sentence.  "  To  eat,  to 
drink,  and  to  sleep,  are  necessary."  It  cannot  become  a 
plmal;  but  it  may  be,  and  frequently  is,  in  the  objective 
case ;  as,  "/  want  to  eat."  The  to  is,  in  some  few  cases, 
omitted  when  the  infinitive  is  in  the  objective  case;  as, 
'■'■I dare  write.''''  But,  "I  daie  to  write,"  is  just  as  neat, 
and  more  proper.  The  to  is  omitted  by  the  use  of  the 
ellipsis,'  as,  "I  like  to  shoot,  hunt,  and  course."  But 
care  must  be  taken  not  to  leave  out  the  to,  if  you  thereby 
make  the  meaning  doubtful.  Repetition  is  sometimes 
disagreeable,  and  tends  to  enfeeble  language;  but  it  is 
always  preferable  to  obscvu'ity. 

Here  is  a  little  difficulty.  Cobbett  has  repeatedly  said  that  the 
nominative  always  follows  the  verb  to  be;  and  so  it  does ;  but  it  is 
not  always  so  with  the  infinitive  of  this  verb.  Look  at  these  two 
sentences : 

I  supposed  it  to  be  him. 
I  am  supposed  to  be  he. 
In  the  first  instance,  the  grammarians  say  that  we  must  say  to  be 
Mm,  because  it  follows  a  word  in  the  objective  case  (it),  and  is  the 
complement  of  that  word;  and  in  the  second  case  we  must  say 
to  be  he,  because  it  follows  a  word  in  the  nominative  case  (I),  and 
is  the  complement  of  that  word.  Observe  that  in  the  second 
example  it  is  as  if  I  said,  "  I  am  supposed  to  be  existing ;'''  and  in 
the  first,  as  if  I  said,  "  I  supposed  something.'''' 

274.  If  you  cast  your  eye  once  more  on  the  conjugation 
of  the  Verb  to  %vork,  in  Letter  VIII,  you  will  see  that  I 
have  there  set  down  the  three  other  modes  with  all  their 
persons,  numbers,  and  times.  The  iraperative  mode  I 
despatched  very  quietly  by  a  single  short  paragraph ;  and, 
indeed,  in  treating  of  the  other  two  modes,  the  indicative 
and  the  subjunctive,  there  is  nothing  to  do  but  to  point 
out  the  trifling  variations  that  oiu'  Verbs  undergo  in  order 
to  make  them  suit  then*  forms  to  the  differences  of  mode. 


As  Relatmg  to    Verbs.  177 

The  indicative  mode  is  that  manner  of  using  the  Verb 
which  is  apphed  when  we  are  speaking  of  an  action  with- 
out any  other  action  being  at  all  connected  with  it,  so  as 
to  make  the  one  a  cwiditioa  or  consequence  of  the  other. 
"  He  works  every  day ;  he  rides  out ; "  and  so  on.  But, 
there  may  be  a  condition  or  a  consequence  dependent  on 
this  working  and  riding;  and  in  that  case  these  Verbs 
must  be  in  the  subjunctive  mode ;  because  the  action  they 
express  depends  on  something  else,  going  before  or  coming 
after.  "  If  he  %ciork  every  day,  he  shall  be  paid  every  day ; 
if  he  ride  out,  he  will  not  be  at  home  by  supper  time." 
The  s  is  di'opped  at  the  end  of  the  Verbs  here;  and  the 
true  cause  is  this,  that  there  is  a  sign  understood.  If 
filled  up,  the  sentence  would  stand  thus :  "  If  he  should 
icork;  if  he  should  ride  out."  So  that,  after  all,  the  Verb 
has,  in  reality,  no  change  of  termination  to  denote  xchat  is 
called  mode.  And  all  the  fuss  which  grammaiians  have 
made  about  the  potential  mode,  and  other  fanciful  dis- 
tinctions of  the  kind,  serve  only  to  puzzle  and  perplex  the 
learner. 

275.  Verbs  in  general,  and,  indeed,  all  the  Verbs,  except 
the  Verb  to  be.,  have  always  the  same  form  in  the  present 
ii?)ie  of  the  i7idicative  and  in  that  of  the  subjunctive,  in 
all  the  persons,  save  the  second  and  third  person  singular. 
Thus,  we  say,  in  the  present  of  the  indicative,  I  work, 
we  work,  you  work,  they  work;  and  in  the  subjunctive  the 
same.  But  we  say,  in  the  former,  thou  workest,  he  works; 
while,  in  the  subjunctive,  we  say,  thou  work,  he  work; 
that  is  to  say,  thou  mayst  work,  or  mightst,  or  shouldst 
(and  so  on),  work ;  and  he  may  work,  or  might  or  should, 
as  the  sense  may  require.  Therefore,  as  to  all  Verbs, 
except  the  Verb  to  be,  it  is  only  in  these  two  persons  that 
any  thing  can  happen  to  render  any  distinction  of  mode 
necessary.  But  the  Verb  to  be  has  more  vai'iation  than 
any  other  Verb.  All  other  Verbs  have  the  same  form  in 
their  indicative  present  time  as  in  their  infinitive  inode, 
8* 


178  Syntax, 

with  the  trifling  exception  of  the  st  and  s  added  to  the 
second  and  thu'd  person  singulai- ;  as,  to  have,  to  write,  to 
work,  to  run;  I  haoe,  I  tor  it  e,  I  work,  I  run.  But  the 
Verb  to  he  becomes,  in  the  present  time  of  its  indicative, 
I  am,  thou  art,  he  is,  we  are,  you  are,  they  are;  which 
are  great  changes.  Therefore,  as  the  subjunctive,  in  all 
its  persons,  takes  the  infinitive  of  the  Verb  without  any 
change  at  all,  the  Verb  to  be  exhibits  the  use  of  this  mode 
most  cleai'ly ;  for,  instead  of  I  am,  thou  ai't,  he  is,  we  are, 
the  subjunctive  requires,  I  be,  thou  be,  he  be,  we  be;  that 
is  to  say,  1 7nay  be,  or  might  be;  and  so  on.  Look  now 
at  the  conjugation  of  the  Verb  to  be,  in  Letter  VIII, 
paragraph  117;  and  then  come  back  to  me. 

276.  You  see,  then,  that  this  imj)ortant  Verb,  to  be,  has 
a  form  in  some  of  its  persons  aj^propriated  to  the  sub- 
junctive mode.  This  is  a  matter  of  consequence.  Dis- 
tiDctions,  without  differences  in  the  things  distinguished, 
are  fanciful,  and,  at  best,  useless.  Here  is  a  real  difference ; 
a  practical  difference ;  a  difference  in  the  form  of  the  word. 
Here  is  a.  past  time  of  the  subjunctive ;  a  past  time  distin- 
guished, in  some  of  its  j^ersons,  by  a  different  manner  of 
spelling  or  writing  the  word.  If  I  be;  if  I  were;  if  he 
were;  and  not  if  I  was,  if  he  icas.  In  the  case  of  other 
Verbs,  the  past  of  the  indicative  is  the  same  as  the  past  of 
the  subjunctive ;  that  is  to  say,  the  Verb  is  written  in  the 
same  letters ;  but  in  the  case  of  the  Verb  to  be  it  is  other- 
wise. If  I  icorked,  if  I  smote,  if  I  had.  Here  the  Verba 
ju'e  the  same  as  in  I  worked,  I  smote,  I  had;  but  in  the 
case  of  the  Verb  to  be,  v>e  must  say,  in  the  past  of  the 
indicative,  I  loas,  and  in  that  of  the  subjunctive,  if  I  were. 

211.  The  question,  then,  is  this:  What  are  the  cases  in 
which  we  ought  to  use  the  subjunctive  form?  Bishop 
Lowth,  and,  on  liis  authority,  IVIr.  Lmdley  MuiTay,  have 
said,  that  some  conjunctions  have  a  gooer)ime)it  of  verbs; 
that  is  to  say,  make  than  or  force  them  to  be  in  the  sub- 
junctive mode.     And  then  these  gentlemen  mention  par- 


As  lielatlitj  to  Verbs.  179 

ticularly  the  conjunctions,  if,  though,  unless,  and  some 
others.  But  (aud  these  gentlemen  allow  it),  the  Verbs 
which  follow  these  conjunctions  are  not  always  in  the 
subjunctive  mode;  and  the  using  of  that  mode  must 
depend,  -not  upon  the  conjunction,  but  upon  the  sense  of 
the  whole  sentence.  How,  then,  can  the  conjunction 
govern  the  Verb?  It  is  the  sense,  the  meaning  of  the 
whole  sentence,  which  must  govern ;  and  of  this  you  will 
presently  see  clear  proof,  "i/'  it  be  dark,  do  not  come 
home.  7/^  eating  is  necessary  to  man,  he  ought  not  to  be 
a  glutton."  In  the  first  of  these  sentences,  the  matter 
expressed  by  the  Verb  may  be  or  may  not  be.  There 
exists  an  uncertainty  on  tha  subject.  And  if  the  sentence 
were  filled  up,  it  wovdd  stand  thus:  "If  it  should  be  dark, 
do  not  come  home."  But  in  the  second  sentence  there 
exists  no  such  uncertainty.  We  know,  and  all  the  world 
knows,  that  eating  is  necessary  to  man.  We  jould  not 
fill  up  the  sentence  with  should;  and,  therefore,  we  make 
use  of  is.  Thus,  then,  the  conjunction  if,  which  you  see 
is  employed  in  both  cases,  has  nothing  at  all  to  do  with 
the  government  of  the  verb.  It  is  the  sense  which 
governs. 

It  is  worth  while,  however,  to  notice  the  conjunctions  that  are 
said  to  govern  the  subjunctive :  though,  although,  unless,  lest,  until, 
till,  whether,  provided  Oiat,  on  condition  that, —  because,  when  used, 
they  generally  Indicate  some  uncertainty.  When  they  do  not  do 
this,  then  the  indicative  must  be  used.  Here  is  an  example  that 
will  illustrate  this.  If  I  were  speaking  of  the  possibilities  in  the 
future  career  of  a  young  man,  I  should  naturally  say:  "Unless 
he  be  honest,  he  will  never,  though  he  be  rich  as  Croesus,  be  happy." 
But  if  I  were  speaking  of  a  real  person,  who  is  actually  rich  as 
Croesus,  I  should  naturally  say,  "Though  he  is  rich  as  Croesus,  he  is 
not  happy."  Again :  "Do  not  admit  him,  unless  he  has  a  ticket." 
Here  we  say  lias,  because  we  anticipate  something  as  fact.  But, 
where  there  is  a  doubt,  we  use  the  subjunctive.  "Do  not  give  him 
the  money,  unless  he  return  you  the  goods."  When,  therefore, 
anything  is  spoken  of  as  actuxilfact,  or  as  in  absolute  existence,  the 
Indicative  is  used.    Those  who  have  studied  French  will  remember 


180  Syntax, 

that  the  French  have  also  a  number  of  words  that  govern  the  sub- 
junctive, and  in  many,  if  not  most,  of  the  cases  where  they  use  the 
subjunctive,  we  do  so  too.  Though  he  be  a  giant;  unless  he  be 
attentive ;  lest  he  hiu"t  you ;  provided  that  he  pay  you ;  on  condi- 
tion that  he  reward  you ;  wait  until  he  come.  The  French  use  the 
subjunctive  in  all  these  cases.  They  also  use  it  after  certain  verbs, 
as  we  do  too;  as,  '"Be  sure  that  he  lay  no  hand  on  you;  mind 
that  he  do  not  touch  you."  You  have  doubtless  noticed  this  use  of 
the  subjunctive  in  such  sentences  as  that  of  Cobbett  himself  in 
paragraph  250:  "  You  must  take  care  that  there  be  a  nominative, 
and  that  it  be  clearly  expressed  or  understood."  Some  writers 
think  that  the  subjunctive  mode  is  fast  passing  out  of  use,  and 
that  it  will  soon  be  altogether  obsolete.  I  can  only  say  that  if  it 
do  go  out  of  use,  we  shall  lose  the  means  of  indicating  different 
shades  of  meaning  in  the  words  we  use.  I  suppose  one  reason 
why  it  is  going  out  of  use  is  because  the  great  army  of  newspaper- 
writers  know  nothing  of  it ;  they  are  obliged  to  write  with  such 
extraordinary  rapidity  and  in  such  haste  that  they  can't  take  time 
to  consider  flne  shades  or  differences  of  meaning  in  the  words  they 
employ. — Notice  that  the  difference  between  the  indicative  and  the 
subjunctive,  in  all  verbs  except  the  verb  to  be,  is  simply  this,  that 
in  the  subjunctive  the  endings  are  all  cut  off.  Cast  your  eye 
over  the  conjugations  of  to  work  and  to  be  worked. 

278.  There  is  a  great  necessity  for  cai'e  as  to  this 
matter;  for  the  meaning  of  what  we  write  is  very  much 
affected  when  we  make  use  of  the  modes  indiscriminately. 
Let  us  take  an  instance.  "  Though  her  chastity  be  right 
and  becoming,  it  gives  her  no  claim  to  praise ;  because  she 
would  be  criminal  if  she  icere  net  chaste."  Now,  by  em- 
ploying the  subjiuictive,  in  the  first  member  of  the  sen- 
tence, we  leave  it  uncertain  whether  it  be  right  or  not  for 
her  to  be  chaste ;  and  by  employing  it  in  the  second,  we 
express  a  doubt  as  to  the  fact  of  her  chastity.  We  mean 
neither  of  these ;  and,  therefore,  notwithstanding  here  are 
a  though  and  an  if,  both  the  Verbs  ought  to  be  in  the 
indicative.  "  Though  her  chastity  is  right  and  becoming, 
it  gives  her  no  claim  to  praise;  because  she  would  be 
crimLaal  if  she  was  not  chaste."  Fill  up  with  the  signs. 
"Though  her  chastity  may  be  right;  if  she  should  not  be 


As  Melating  to  Verbs.  181 

chaste ; "  and  then  you  see,  at  once,  what  a  difference  there 
is  in  the  meaning. 

279.  The  subjunctive  is  necessarily  always  used  where 
a  sign  is  left  out;  as,  "Take  care  that  he  come  to-morrow, 
that  you  be  ready  to  receive  him,  that  he  be  well  received, 
and  that  all  things  be  duly  prepared  for  his  entertain- 
ment." Fill  up  with  the  signs,  and  you  will  see  the  reason 
for  what  you  write. 

280.  The  Verb  to  be  is  sometimes  used  thus :  "  Were  fie 
rich,  I  should  not  like  him  the  better.  Were  it  not  dark, 
I  would  go."  That  is  to  say,  if  he  %oere;  if  it  were.  '■'•It 
tcere  a  jest,  indeed,  to  consider  a  set  of  seat-sellers  and 
seat-buyers  as  a  lawful  legislative  body.  It  were  to  violate 
every  principle  of  moraUty  to  consider  honesty  as  a  virtue, 
when  not  to  be  honest  is  a  crime  which  the  law  punishes." 
The  it  stands  for  a  gi-eat  deal  here.  "  Ridiculous,  indeed, 
would  the  state  of  our  minds  be,  if  it  were  such  as  to 
exhibit  a  set  of  seat-sellers  and  seat-buyers  as  a  lawful 
legislative  body."  I  mention  these  instances  because  they 
appear  unaccountable/  and  I  never  like  to  slur  things 
over.  Those  expressions  for  the  using  of  which  we  cannot 
give  a  reason  ought  not  to  be  used  at  all. 

There  is  another  use  of  the  verb  to  be,  unnoticed  by  Cobbett, 
which  may  be  spoken  of  here.  It  has  long  been  a  matter  of  con- 
troversy whether  we  should  say,  "the  bridge  is  building,"  or  "the 
bridge  is  being  built;"  "preparations  are  making,"  or  "prepara- 
tions are  being  made."  Mr.  White  maintains  that  the  former  is 
the  only  proper  form,  and  that  the  latter  form  is  contrary  to  the 
genius  of  our  language.  And  other  critics  are  of  the  same  opinion. 
Well,  there  is  no  use  in  talking  of  it  now;  it  is  too  late  to  alter  itj 
for  this  manner  of  speaking  is  now  used  by  almost  everybody  that 
speaks  or  writes  English.  Every  newspaper  in  the  United  States 
uses  this  form;  and  the  truth  ts,  it  has  become  a  necessity,  for 
there  are  some  cases  in  which  no  other  form  can  be  used  without 
changing  the  meaning  of  the  sentence.  We  can  say,  The  house  is 
buildmg,  the  book  is  printing,  the  play  is  acting,  the  bread  is 
baking,  the  clothes  are  making,  and  so  on,  in  many  other  instances ; 
but   we  cannot  say,   "The   boy  is  whipping"  or  "The  girl  is 


182  Syntax, 

ruining"  to  signify  that  "The  boy  is  being  whipped"  or  "The 
girl  is  being  ruined."  No;  it  is  no  use  trying  to  change  this  now; 
there  are  certain  cases  where  we  mxist  use- "  is  being ;"  it  is  in  the 
very  life-blood  of  the  language ;  it  is  every-day  English ;  and  there 
is  no  taking  it  out.  It  is  like  the  word  execute,  which  originally 
meant,  and  still  properly  means,  to  put  a  sentence  into  force ;  but 
row  it  is  used  every  day,  in  print  and  in  conversation,  to  signify 
putting  a  person  to  death.  And  there  is  no  doubt  but  it  will  con- 
tinue to  be  so  used  to  the  end  of  time ;  for  no  dictum  of  the  critics 
can  change  it. 

It  is  worth  while  remarking,  that  in  sentences  like  "  The  house 
is  building,"  "the  corn  is  thrashing,"  the  words  building  and 
thrashing  are  not  verbs,  but  nouns;  for  the  original  form  was  "in 
building,"  "in  thrashing."  The  Germans  have  an  entirely  different 
verb  for  such  expressions;  for  "The  house  is  building"  they  say 
Das  Haus  wird  gebaut,  and  not  Das  Haus  ist  gebaut,  which  latter 
means  The  house  is  built. 

281.  As  to  instances  in  whicli  authors  have  violated  the 
principles  of  grammar,  with  respect  to  the  use  of  the 
modes,  I  could  easily  fill  a  book  much  larger  than  this 
with  instances  of  this  kind  from  Judge  Blackstone  and 
Doctor  Johnson.  One  only  shall  suffice.  I  take  it  from 
the  Judge's  fii'st  Book.  "  Therefore,  if  the  king  purchases 
lands  of  the  natvu'e  of  gavel-kind,  where  all  the  sons  inherit 
equally;  yet,  upon  the  king's  demise,  his  eldest  son  shall 
succeed  to  these  lands  alone'''  Here  is  fine  confusion, 
not  to  say  something  inclining  towards  high  treason ;  for, 
if  the  king's  son  be  to  inherit  these  lands  alone,  he,  of 
course,  is  not  to  inherit  the  croion.  But  it  is  the  Verb 
purchases  with  which  we  have  to  do  at  present.  Now,  it 
is  notorious  that  the  king  does  not  pui'chase  lands  in 
gavel-kind,  or  any  other  lands ;  whereas,  from  the  form  of 
the  Verb,  it  is  taken  for  granted  that  he  does  it.  It  should 
have  been,  "  If  the  king  purchase  lands ; "  that  is  to  say, 
if  he  were  to  jjiirchase,  or  if  he  shoxdd purchase. 

282.  Thus,  my  dear  James,  have  I  gone  through  all 
that  appeared  to  me  of  importance  relating  to  Verbs. 
Every  part  of  the  Letter  ought  to  be  carefully  read,  and 


As  Melating  to  Verbs.  183 

its  meaning  ought  to  be  well  weighed  in  your  mind ;  but 
always  recollect  that,  in  the  using  of  Verbs,  that  which 
requii-es  your  fii'st  and  most  earnest  care  is  the  ascertain- 
ing of  the  nominative  of  the  sentence ;  for,  out  of  every 
hundi'ed  grammatical  errors,  full  fifty,  I  believe,  ai'e  com- 
mitted for  want  of  due  attention  to  this  matter. 

Let  me  say  a  word  here  which  will  make  clear  to  you  what  the 
Germans  meau  by  what  they  call  genetic  teaching ;  that  is,  unfold- 
ing a  subject  in  such  a  way  as  to  show  how  it  originates  and  grows 
up  to  completion.  The  shortest  possible  sentence  must  have  a  sub- 
ject and  a  predicate  (nominative  and  verb) ;  for  although  the  one 
word,  "Love!"  is  a  sentence,  the  subject  is  understood:  "Love 
thou ! "  The  next  step  is  the  object :  ' '  Love  thou  me ! "  A  sentence 
may,  therefore,  consist  of  merely  subject  and  predicate,  or  of  sub- 
ject, predicate,  and  object. 

The  last  is  an  imperative  sentence ;  let  us  take  a  declarative  one. 
"Men  love."  This  is  a  sentence ;  it  contains  subject  and  predicate, 
and  makes  complete  sense.  "Men  love  women."  This  has  sub- 
ject, predicate,  and  object.  Now  we  may  go  on  adding  words, 
phrases,  and  clauses,  modifying  each  of  these  chief  parts  of  the 
sentence,  until  we  stretch  it  out  into  a  compoimd  or  complex  sen- 
tence. For  a  sentence,  like  a  house,  is  just  built  up  by  successive 
additions.  These  additions  are  often  called  adjuncts ;  they  consist 
of  single  words,  of  phrases  and  clauses.  I  shall  add  all  I  can  to  the 
separate  words  of  this  sentence;  first  modifying  the  subject  by 
various  single  words,  then  by  a  phrase,  then  by  a  clause ;  and  then 
I  shall  endeavor  to  do  the  same  to  the  predicate  and  the  object. 
Now  observe,  and  you  will  see  how  a  sentence  grows : 

Men  love  women. 

The  men  love  women.  < 

The  worthy  men  love  women. 

The  very  worthy  men  love  women. 

The  very  worthy  men  in  this  city  love  women. 

The  very  worthy  men  in  this  city,  who  are  noted  for  their  excellent  char- 
acter, love  women. 

Here  we  have  modified  the  subject,  first  by  the  definite  article, 
then  by  an  adjective,  then  we  have  modified  the  adjective  by  an 
adverb,  then  we  have  modified  or  limited  the  subject  by  a  phrase, 
and  finally  by  a  clause.  Now  let  us  try  and  do  the  same  thing  to 
the  predicate  and  the  object : 


184  Syntax,  as  Melating  to  Adverbs, 

Men  love  women. 

Men  love  the  women. 

Men  love  the  good  women. 

Men  love  the  very  good  women. 

Men  love  dearly  the  very  good  women. 

Men  love  dearly  the  very  good  women  of  this  city. 

Men  love  dearly  the  very  good  women  of  this  city,  who  are  respected  by 

all  the  world. 

The  whole  sentence  will  therefore  be  ;  "  The  very  worthy  men  in 
this  city,  who  are  noted  for  their  excellent  character,  love  dearly 
the  very  good  women  of  this  city,  who  are  respected  by  all  the 
world."  This,  therefore,  has  now  become  a  complex  sentence, 
of  which  the  chief  clause  is,  "Men  love  women,"  and  all  the  rest 
modifies  the  subject,  the  predicate,  and  the  object  of  this  clause. 
Of  course,  it  might  be  extended  much  farther;  but  this  will  do  to 
show  you  how  a  sentence  grows;  or,  if  you  please,  how  it  is 
built  up.  Should  you  ever  be  requested  to  give  a  trial  lesson  in 
English  grammar,  in  a  class  of  scholars  who  have  learned  some- 
thing of  the  subject,  you  cannot  do  better  than  show  them,  in 
this  manner,  liow  a  sentence  is  formed. 


LETTER   XX. 

SYNTAX,  AS  RELATING  TO  ADVERBS,  PREPOSITIONS,  AND  CON- 
JUNCTIONS. 

283.  After  what  lias  been  said,  my  dear  James,  on  the 
subject  of  the  Verb,  there  remains  little  to  be  added.  The 
Adverbs,  J^repositloiis,  and  Conjunctions,  are  all  words 
which  never  vary  their  endings.  Theu'  uses  have  been 
sufficiently  illustrated  in  the  Letters  on  the  Syntax  of 
Nouns,  Pronouns,  and  Verbs.  In  a  Letter,  which  is  yet  to 
come,  and  which  will  contain  specimens  oi  false  grammar, 
the  misuse  of  many  words,  belonging  to  these  inferior 
Parts  of  Speech,  will  be  noticed ;  but  it  would  be  a  waste 
of  your  time  to  detain  you  by  an  elaborate  account  of 
that  which  it  is,  by  this  time,  hai-dly  possible  for  you  not 
to  understand. 

284.  Some  grammai-ians  have  given  lists  of  Adverbs, 


JPrepositions,  and  Oonjunctiona.  185 

Prepositiotis,  and  Conjunctions.  For  what  reason  I  know 
not,  seeing  that  they  have  not  attempted  to  give  lists  of 
the  "words  of  other  pai'ts  of  speech.  These  lists  must  be 
defective,  and,  therefore,  worse  than  no  lists.  To  find  out 
the  meaning  of  single  words,  the  Dictionary  is  the  place. 
The  business  of  grammar  is  to  show  the  connection  be- 
tween words,  and  the  manner  of  using  words  properly. 
The  sole  cause  of  this  dwelling  upon  these  parts  of  speech 
appears  to  me  to  have  been  a  notion  that  they  would  seem 
to  be  neglected,  unless  a  certain  number  of  j^ages  of  the 
book  were  allotted  to  each.  To  be  siu-e  each  of  them  is  a 
part  of  speech,  as  completely  as  the  little  finger  is  a  part 
of  the  body ;  but  few  persons  will  thmk  that,  because  we 
descant  very  frequently,  and  at  great  length,  ui^on  the 
qualities  of  the  head  and  heart,  we  ought  to  do  the  same 
with  regard  to  the  qualities  of  the  little  finger. 

^85.  I  omitted,  in  the  Letter  on  Verbs,  to  notice  th« 
^se  of  the  word  thing;  and  I  am  not  sorry  that  I  tua,  »«*- 
cause  by  my  noticing  it  in  this  concluding  pai'agraph,  tUf 
matter  may  make  a  deeper  impression  on  yovu-  mind. 
Thing  is,  of  course,  a  noun.  A. pen  is  a  thing,  and  every 
animal,  or  creatine,  animate  or  inanimate,  is  a  thing.  We 
apply  it  to  the  representing  of  every  creatuie  in  the  uni- 
verse, except  to  men,  women,  and  children ;  and  a  creature 
:s  that  which  has  been  created,  be  it  living,  like  a  horse., 
or  dead,  like  dirt  or  stones.  The  use  of  the  word  thing., 
as  far  as  this  goes,  is  plainly  reconcilable  to  reason ;  but 
"to  get  di'unk  is  a  beastly  thing.''  Here  is  neither  human 
being,  u'rational  animal,  nor  inanimate  creatui-e.  Here  is 
merely  an  action.  Well,  then,  this  action  is  the  thing; 
for,  as  you  have  seen  in  Letter  XIX,  paragraph  273,  a 
verb  in  the  infinitive  mode  has,  in  almost  all  respects,  the 
functions  and  powers  of  a  yionn.  "  It  was  a  most  atrocious 
thing  to  uphold  the  Bank  of  England  in  refusing  to  give 
gold  for  its  promissory  notes,  and  to  compel  the  nation  to 
submit  to  the  wrong  that  it  sustained  from  that  refusal." 


186  Syntax. 

The  meaning  is,  that  the  whole  of  these  measiires  or  trans- 
actions constituted  a  most  atrocious  deed  or  thing. 

Cobbett  despatches  the  syntax  of  adverbs  in  half-a-dozen  lines ; 
and  yet  there  is  one  little  matter  connected  with  the  use  of  these 
words  that  has,  perhaps,  caused  more  uncertainty,  perplexing 
uncertainty,  than  anything  connected  with  grammar.  We  say, 
rightly,  that  he  fights  bravely  and  she  sings  finely ;  but  shall  I  say 
that  he  looks  bravely  and  that  her  voice  sounds  finely  ?  I  may  say 
that  he  dances  smoothly  and  that  she  plays  sweetly;  but  shall 
I  say  that  his  coat  feels  smoothly  and  that  she  looks  sweetly?  If 
not,  how  am  I  to  know  when  to  use  the  adverb  and  when  the 
adjective? 

This,  as  I  have  said,  is  a  matter  which  has  puzzled  many  a  stu- 
dent of  grammar,  and  caused  anxiety  to  many  a  young  writer.  Here 
is  a  rule  which  I  have  never  seen  in  any  grammar,  but  which,  I  think, 
will  cover  the  majority  of  such  cases,  and  is  easily  understood 
and  remembered :  After  all  the  verbs  referring  to  the  five  senses, 
the  adjective,  and  not  the  adverb,  is  to  be  used :  as.  It  tastes  good; 
it  smells  nke;  it  sounds  harsh;  it  feels  smooth;  it  looks  handsome. 
Expressed  in  a  larger  and  more  comprehensive  manner,  the  rule 
might  stand  thus :  Wherever  manner  is  to  be  expressed,  use  the 
adverb;  wherever  quality  is  to  be  expressed,  use  the  adjective. 
Cobbett  repeatedly  uses  the  expression  "  talks /«.e;"  meaning,  of 
course,  fine  talk,  and  not  the  inanner  of  speaking.  In  the  same 
way,  we  must  say,  "  I  arrived  here  safe  and  sound,"  and  not,  safely 
and  soundly;  for  it  is  not  the  manner  of  arriving,  but  the  state  in 
which  he  arrived,  that  is  meant. 

I  thought  that  Cobbett  explained  somewhere  in  this  grammar 
the  diflference  between  so  and  such;  but  I  cannot  find  it.  Jlr. 
Swintonsays;  'VSc  has  sometimes  a  pronominal  use;  as,  'Whether 
he  is  a  genius  or  not,  he  is  considered  so ' —  (a  genius)."  I  think 
this  is  an  error;  so  is  used  adjectively  and  adverbially,  not  pro- 
nominally ;  su/:h  is  used  pronominally ;  as.  Whether  he  be  a  genius 
or  not,  he  is  considered  jsmc/j;  whetlier  he  be  rich  or  not,  he  is 
considered  so.     (See  paragraph  143.) 

By  the  way,  I  ought  to  have  stated  in  another  place  that  it  is 
correct  to  say,  "Two  and  two  isio\\r\  five  times  five  is  twenty- 
five,"  for  these  are  abstract  numbers,  and  are  looked  upon  as 
one  sum.  But  if  you  make  the  numbers  concrete  or  denominate, 
then  you  must  use  the  verb  in  the  plural;  as,  "Two  horses  and 
two  horses  are  four  horses,  five  times  five  horses  are  twenty-five 
horses." 


Specimens  of  F'alse   Gi-ammar.  187 


LETTER   XXI. 

SPECIMENS    OF    FALSE    GRAMMAR,  TAKEN    FROM    THE   ■WRITINGS   OF 
DOCTOR    JOHNSON,    AND    FROM    THOSE    OF    DOCTOR    WATTS. 

My  DEAR  James  : 

The  chief  object  of  this  Letter  is  to  prove  to  you  the 
necessity  of  using  great  care  and  caution  in  the  construc- 
tion of  your  sentences.  Wlien  you  see  writers  like  Dr. 
Johnson  and  Dr.  Watts  committing  grammatical  eiTors, 
and,  in  some  instances,  making  their  words  amount  to 
nonsense,  or  at  least  making  their  meaning  doubtful ;  when 
you  see  this  in  the  author  of  a  grammar  and  of  a  dictionaiy 
of  the  English  language,  and  in  the  author  of  a  work  on 
the  subject  of  logic;  and  when  you  are  informed  that 
these  were  two  of  the  most  learned  men  that  England 
ever  produced,  you  cannot  fail  to  be  convinced  that  con- 
stant cai'e  and  caution  are  necessary  to  prevent  you  from 
committing  not  only  similar,  but  much  greater,  errors. 

Another  object,  in  the  producing  of  these  specimens,  is 
to  convince  you  that  a  knowledge  of  the  Latin  and  Greek 
languages  does  not  prevent  men  from  writing  bad  EngUsli. 
Those  languages  are,  by  impostors  and  their  dupes,  called 
"  the  learned  languages ; "  and  those  who  have  paid  for 
having  studied  them  are  said  to  have  received  "  a  liberal 
education."  These  appellations  ai"e  false,  and,  of  course, 
they  lead  to  false  conclusions.  Learning^  as  a  noim, 
means  knowledge,  and  learned  means  knoiciyig,  or  pos- 
sessed of  knowledge.  Leai'ning  is,  then,  to  be  acquired 
by  conception  y'  and,  it  is  shown  in  Judgment,  in  reasoning^ 
and  in  the  various  modes  of  employuig  it.  What,  then, 
can  learning  have  to  do  with  any  particulai'  tongue! 
Good  grannnar,  for  instance,  written  in  Welsh,  or  in  the 
language  of  the  Chippewa  savages,  is  more  learned  than 
bad  grammar  wiitten  in  Greek.     The  leai*ning  is  in  tlie 


188  Specimens  of  liaise  Grammar. 

mind  and  not  in  tlie  tongue;  learning  consists  of  ideas 
and  not  of  the  noise  that  is  made  by  the  mouth.  If,  for 
instance,  the  Reports  dj^-awn  up  by  the  House  of  Commons, 
and  which  are  compositions  discovering  in  every  sentence 
ignorance  the  most  profound,  were  written  in  Latin, 
should  we  then  call  them  learned?  Should  we  say  that 
the  mere  change  of  the  words  from  one  tongue  into 
another  made  that  learned  which  was  before  unlearned? 
As  well  may  we  say  that  a  falsehood  written  in  Enghsh 
would  have  been  truth  if  written  in  Latin;  and  as  well 
may  we  say  that  a  certain  handwriting  is  a  leai'ned  hand- 
writing, or,  that  certain  sorts  of  ink  and  paper  are  learned 
ink  and  paper,  as  that  a  language,  or  tongue,  is  a  learned 
language  or  tongue. 

The  cause  of  the  use  of  this  false  appellation,  "  learned 
languages,"  is  this,  that  those  who  teach  them  in  England 
have,  in  consequence  of  then*  teaching,  very  large  estates 
in  house  and  land.,  which  are  public  property,  but  which 
ai-e  now  used  for  the  sole  benefit  of  those  teachers,  who 
are,  in  general,  the  relations  or  dependents  of  the  aristoc- 
racy. In  order  to  give  a  color  of  reasonableness  to  this 
species  of  appropriation,  the  languages  taught  by  the 
possessors  ai-e  called  "  the  learned  languages ;"  and  which 
appellation  is,  at  the  same  time,  intended  to  cause  the 
mass  of  the  people  to  believe  that  the  professors  and 
learners  of  these  languages  are,  in  point  of  wisdom,  far 
superior  to  other  men ;  and  to  establish  the  opinion  that 
all  but  themselves  are  unlearned  persons.  In  short,  the 
appellation,  like  many  others,  is  a  trick  which  fraud  has 
furnished  for  the  purpose  of  guarding  the  snug  possessors 
of  the  proj^erty  against  the  consequences  of  the  people's 
understanding  the  matter. 

It  is  cui'ions  enough  that  this  appellation  of  "  learned 
languages "  is  confined  to  the  English  nation  and  the 
American,  which  inherits  it  from  the  English.  Neither 
in  Prance,  in  Spain,  in  Italy,  nor  in  Germany,  is  this  false 


Specimens  of  False   Grammar.  189 

and  absui'd  appellation  in  use.  The  same  motives  have 
not  existed  in  those  countries.  There  the  monks  and 
other  priests  have  inherited  from  the  founders.  They 
had  not  any  occasion  to  resort  to  this  species  of  imposition- 
But  in  England  the  thing  required  to  be  glossed  over. 
There  was  something  or  other  requu'ed  in  that  countiy 
as  an  apology  for  taking  many  millions  a  year  from  the 
public  to  keep  men  to  do  no  apparently  useful  thing. 

Seeing  themselves  unable  to  maintain  the  position  that 
the  Latin  and  Greek  are  more  '■'■learned  languages"  thaai 
others,  the  impostors  and  their  dupes  tell  us  that  this  is 
not  what  they  mean.  They  mean,  they  say,  not  that  those 
languages  are,  in  themselves,  more  leai'ned  than  others: 
but  that,  to  possess  a  knowledge  of  them  is  a  proof  that 
the  possessor  is  a  learned  man.  To  be  sure,  they  do  not 
offer  us  any  argument  in  support  of  this  assertion ;  while 
it  would  be  easy  to  show  that  the  assertion  must,  in  every 
case,  be  false.  But  let  it  suffice,  for  this  time,  that  we 
show  that  the  possession  of  the  knowledge  of  those  lan- 
guages does  not  prevent  men  from  committing  numerous 
grammatical  errors  when  they  write  in  their  native  lan- 
guage. 

I  have,  for  this  jpui-pose,  fixed  upon  the  writings  of 
Doctor  Johnson  and  of  Doctor  Watts ;  because,  besides 
its  being  well  known  that  they  were  deeply  skilled  in 
Latin  and  Greek,  it  would  be  difficult  to  find  two  men 
with  more  real  learning.  I  take  also  the  two  works  for 
which  they  aie  respectively  the  most  celebrated;  the 
Rambler  of  Doctor  Johnson,  and  the  Logic  of  Doctor 
Watts.  These  are  works  of  very  great  learning.  The 
Bambler,  though  its  general  tendency  is  to  spread  a 
gloom  over  life,  and  to  damp  all  enterprise,  piivate  as 
well  as  public,  displays  a  vast  frmd  of  knowledge  in  the 
science  of  morals;  and  the  Logic,  though  the  religious 
zeal  of  its  pious,  sincere,  and  benevolent  author  has  led 
him  into  the  very  great  error  of  taking  his  examples  of 


190  i^ecime?is  of  liaise  Grammar. 

self-evident  propositious  from  amongst  those,  many  of 
•which  great  numbers  of  men  think  not  to  be  self-evident, 
is  a  work  wherein  profound  learning  is  conveyed  in  a 
style  the  most  simple,  and  in  a  manner  the  most  pleasing. 
It  is  impossible  to  believe  that  the  Logic  was  not  revised 
with  great  cai-e :  and,  as  to  the  Rambler,  the  biographer 
of  its  author  tells  us  that  the  Doctor  made  six  thousand 
corrections  and  alterations  before  the  work  was  printed 
in  volumes. 

The  Rambler  is  in  Numbers;  therefore,  at  the  end  of 
each  extract  from  it,  I  shall  put  the  letter  R,  and  the 
Number.  The  Logic  is  divided  into  Parts  and  Chapters. 
At  the  end  of  each  extract  from  it,  I  shall  put  L ;  and 
then  add  the  Part  and  Chapter.  I  shall  range  the  ex- 
tracts under  the  names  of  the  parts  of  speech  to  which 
the  erroneous  words  respectively  belong. 

ARTICLES. 

"  I  invited  her  to  spend  the  day  in  viewing  a  seat  and 
gardens.^' — R.  No.  34 

"For  all  our  speculative  acquaintance  with  things 
should  be  made  subservient  to  our  better  conduct  in  the 
civil  and  religious  life." — L.  Introduction. 

The  indefinite  article  a  cannot,  you  know,  be  put  before 
&  plural  noun.  We  cannot  say  a  gardens;  but  this  is,  in 
fact,  said  in  the  above  extract.  It  should  have  been  "  a 
seat  and  its  gai'dens."  '■'■Civil  and  religious  life,''''  in  the 
second  extract  are  general  and  indefinite.  The  article, 
therefore,  was  unnecessary,  and  is  improperly  used.  Look 
back  at  the  use  of  Ai'ticles,  Letter  IV. 

NOUNS. 

"Among  the  innumerable  historical  authors,  who  fill 
every  nation  with  accounts  of  their  ancestors,  or  under- 
take to  transmit  to  futurity  the  events  of  their  own  time. 


Specimens  of  False   Gratmnar.  191 

the  greater  pait,  when  fashion  and  novelty  have  ceased  to 
recommend  thexi.,  ai'e  of  no  other  use  than  chronological 
memorials,  which  necessity  may  sometimes  require  to  be 
consulted."— E.  No.  122. 

This  is  all  confusion.  Whose  ancestors'?  The  jiatiori's 
ancestors  are  meant ;  but  the  a  uihors'  are  expressed.  The 
two  theirs  and  the  them  clearly  apply  to  the  sam,e  Noun. 
How  easily  all  this  confusion  would  have  been  avoided 
by  considering  the  niition  as  a  singular,  and  saying  its 
ancestors  I  In  the  latter  part  of  the  sentence,  the  authors 
are  called  chronological  tnemorials;  and  though  we  may, 
in  some  cases,  use  the  word  author  for  author^ s  work; 
yet,  in  a  case  like  this,  where  we  are  spealdng  of  the 
authors  as  actors,  we  cannot  take  such  a  hberty. 

"  Each  of  these  classes  of  the  human  race  has  desires, 
fears,  and  conversation  pecuhar  to  itself;  cai'es  which 
another  cannot  feel,  and  pleasvu'es  which  he  cannot  par- 
take."—R.  No.  160. 

The  noun  of  mviltitude,  classes,  being  preceded  by  each^ 
has  the  prouoim  itself  properly  put  after  it ;  but  the  he 
does  not  correspond  with  these.  It  should  have  been  it. 
"With  regard  to  these  two  extracts,  see  paragraph  181. 

"  His  great  ambition  was  to  shoot  flying,  and  he,  there- 
fore, spent  whole  days  in  the  woods,  pursuing  game, 
which,  before  he  was  near  enough  to  see  them,  his  ap- 
proach flighted  away." — R.  No.  66. 

Game  is  not  a  noun  of  inultitude,  like  mob,  or  Souse 
of  Commons.  There  ai'e  different  games  or  pastimes; 
but  this  word,  as  api)lied  to  the  describing  of  wild  ani- 
mals, has  no  plural ;  and,  therefore,  cannot  have  a  plural 
pronoun  to  stand  for  it. 

"The  obvious  duties  of  piety  towards  God  and  love 
towai'ds  man,  with  the  governments  of  all  our  inclinations 
and  passions." — L.  Pai"t  4. 

This  plui-al  is  so  clearly  wrong  that  I  need  not  shov? 
tohy  it  is  wi'ong. 


192  Specimens  of  F'alse  Grammar. 

"And  by  this  mean  they  will  better  judge  what  to 
choose." — L.  Part  4. 

Meati,  as  a  nouB,  is  never  used  in  the  singular.  It, 
like  some  other  words,  has  broken  loose  from  all  principle 
and  rule.  By  universal  acquiescence  it  is  become  always 
a  plural,  whether  used  with  singular  or  pliu-al  pronouns 
and  articles  or  not.  Doctor  Watts,  in  other  instances, 
says,  this  means. 

It  is  curious  enough  that  we  have  several  plural  words  like  this, 
used  111  a  singular  manner.  We  not  only  say  this  means,  but  this 
news,  this  series,  and  this  species.  We  say,  "Great  pains  is  taken  , 
he  has  taken  muc?i  pains;"  because,  in  this  sense,  pains  means 
exertion,  trouble;  while  in  the  plural  it  means  bodili/  pains.  Mean., 
means,  are  properly  used  in  the  singular  and  plural  when  applied 
to  the  terms  used  in  proportion.  When  you  are  speaking  of 
vax'ious  disti?ict  things  or  operations,  you  ought  to  say,  "By  these 
means;"  but  when  you  are  speaking  of  things  or  circumstances  in 
&mass,  you  must  say,  "By  this  means.''''  Such  sentences  as,  "This 
is  one  means  of  gaining  3'our  end,"  and  "  The  best  means  is  by  fair 
play,"  are  perfectly  correct. 

"  Having  delayed  to  buy  a  coach  myself,  till  I  should 
have  the  lady's  opinion,  for  whose  use  it  was  intended." 
— R.  No.  34. 

We  know  that  rchose  relates  to  lady,  according  to  the 
Doctor's  meaning;  but,  grammatically,  it  does  not.  It 
relates  to  opinion.  It  should  have  been,  "  the  opinion  of 
the  lady,  for  whose  use."  See  Syntax  of  Nouns,  Letter 
XVI,  paragi-aphs  170,  171. 

PRONOUNS. 

"  Had  the  opinion  of  my  censurers  been  unanimous,  it 
might  have  overset  my  resolutions ;  but,  since  I  find  them 
at  variance  with  each  other,  I  can,  without  scruple,  neg- 
lect them,  and  follow  my  own  imagination." — R.  No.  23. 

You  see  the  Doctor  has,  in  the  last  member  of  the  sen- 
tence, the  censurers  in  his  eye,  and  he  forgets  his  nomina- 


Specimens  of  False  Ghramrnar.  193 

tive,  opinion.  It  is  the  opinion  that  was  not  unanimous, 
and  not  the  censurers  who  were  not  unanimous ;  for  they 
were  unanimous  in  censiu'ing. 

"  7%ey  that  frequent  the  chambers  of  the  sick  will  gen- 
erally find  the  sharpest  pains  and  most  stubborn  mala- 
dies among  them  whom  confidence  in  the  force  of  natui'e 
formerly  betrayed  to  negligence  or  irregularity ;  and  that 
superfluity  of  strength,  which  was  at  once  their  boast  and 
their  snaie,  has  often,  to  the  end,  no  other  effect  than 
that  it  continues  them  long  in  impotence  and  anguish." — 
R.  No.  38. 

The  they  and  the  first  them  ought  to  be  those;  the  to 
ought  to  be  into.  The  two  theirs  and  the  last  them  ai'e 
not  absolutely  faulty,  but  they  do  not  cleai'ly  enough  re- 
late to  their  antecedent.  --~7 

"  Metissa  brought  with  her  an  old  maid,  recommended 
by  her  mother,  who  taught  her  all  the  arts  of  domestic  , 
management,  and  was,  on  every  occasion,  her  chief  agent  I 
and  directress.  They  soon  invented  one  reason  or  other  ^ 
to  quarrel  with  all  my  servants,  and  either  prevailed  on  / 
me  to  turn  them,  away,  or  treated  them  so  ill  that  they  left  / 
me  of  themselves,  and  always  supplied  their  places  with! 
some  brought  from  my  wife's  family." — R.  No.  35.  I 

Here  is  perfect  confusion  and  pell-mell!     Which  of  thej 
two,  the  old  maid  or  the  mother,  was  it  that  taught  the; 
arts  of  domestic  management?     And  which  of  the  two: 
was  taught,  Metissa  or   the  old  maid?      "They  soon\ 
invented."     Who  are  they?     Are  there  two,  or  all  the  j 
three?     And  who  supplied  the  places  of  the  servants?  j 
The  meaning  of  the  toords  cleai-ly  is  that  the  servants  j 
themselves  supplied  the  places.     It  is  very  rarely  that  we  j 
meet  with  so  bad  a  sentence  as  this.  J 

"  I  shall  not  trouble  you  with  a  history  of  the  strata- 
gems practised  upon  my  judgment,  or  the  allvu'ements 
tried  upon  my  heai't,  which,  if  you  have,  in  any  part  of 
your  life,  been  acquainted  with  rural  politics,  you  will 
9 


194  Specimens  of  False  Grammar. 

easily  conceive.  Their  arts  have  no  great  variety,  they 
think  nothing  worth  their  care  but  money." — R.  No.  35. 

"Their  arts;"  but?oAo.se  arts?  There  is  no  antecedent, 
except  "  rural  politics  f  and  thus,  all  this  last  sentence  is 
perfect  nonsense. 

"  But  the  fear  of  not  being  approved  as  just  copiers  of 
human  manners  is  not  the  most  important  concern  that 
an  author  of  this  sort  ought  to  have  before  him.^'' — R. 
No.  4. 

An  author  cannot  be  said  to  fear  not  to  be  approved 
as  just  copiers.  The  word  author  ought  to  have  been  in 
the  plural,  and  him  ought  to  have  been  them. 

"  The  wit,  whose  vivacity  condemns  slower  tongues  to 
silence;  the  scholar,  whose  knowledge  allows  no  man  to 
think  he  instructs  him!" — R.  No.  188. 

Which  of  the  txoo  is  allowed?  The  scholar  or  the  no 
man  ?  "Which  of  the  two  does  he  relate  to ?  Which  of 
the  two  does  the  hi^n  relate  to  ?  By  a  little  reflection  we 
may  come  at  the  Doctor's  meaning ;  but  if  we  may  stop 
to  discover  the  grammatical  meaning  of  an  author's 
words,  how  are  we  to  imbibe  the  science  which  he  would 
teach  us? 

"  The  state  of  the  possessor  of  humble  virtues,  to  the 
afifector  of  gi'eat  excellencies,  is  that  of  a  small  cottage  of 
stone,  to  the  palace  raised  with  ice  by  the  Empress  of 
Russia;  it  was,  for  a  time,  splendid  and  luminous,  but 
the  first  sunshine  melted  it  to  nothing." — R.  No.  22. 

^Vhich,  instead  of  it,  would  have  made  cleai'  that  which 
is  now  dubious,  for  it  may  relate  to  cottage  as  well  as  to 
palace ;  or  it  may  I'elate  to  state. 

We  do  not  now  say  excellencies,  but  excellences,  for  the  singular  is 
excellence.  Excellencies  is  the  phiral  of  excellency,  which  is  now  sel- 
dom used  except  as  a  t'tle  of  honor.  It  is  the  same  kind  of  error 
as  Castlereagh's  indulgencies,  which  you  will  see  by-and-by. 

"  The  love  of  retirement  has,  in  all  ages,  adhered  closely 
to  those  minds  which  have  been  most  enlarged  by  knowl- 


Specimens  of  FaUe  Crratnmar.  195 

ed^e,  or  elevated  by  genius.  Those  who  enjoyed  every- 
thing generally  supposed  to  confer  happiness,  have  been 
forced  to  seek  it  in  the  shades  of  privacy." — R.  No.  7. 

To  seek  lohat  f  The  love  of  retirement,  or  everything  ? 
The  Doctor  means  ha2)inness,  but  his  words  do  not  mean  it. 

"Those  who  enjoyed"  ought  to  be  "Those  who  have  enjoyed ;" 
because  no  particular  time  is  mentioned.     (See  paragraph  261.) 

"  Yet  there  is  a  certain  race  of  men  that  make  it  their 
duty  to  hinder  the  reception  of  every  woi-k  of  learning  or 
genius,  who  stand  as  sentinels  in  the  avenues  of  fame, 
and  value  themselves  upon  giving  ignorance  and  envy  the 
first  notice  of  a  prey."" — R.  No.  3. 

That,  or  viho,  may,  as  we  have  seen,  be  the  relative  of 
a  noun,  which  is  the  name  of  a  rational  being  or  beings; 
but  both  cannot  be  used,  applicable  to  the  same  noun  in 
the  same  sentence.  Nor  is  "  a  prey  "  proper.  I^rey  has 
no  plural.  It  is  Yikefat,  meat,  grease,  garbage,  and  many 
other  words  of  that  description. 

"  For,  among  all  the  animals  upon  which  natui'e  has 
impressed  deformity  and  horror,  there  was  none  xohom 
he  diu'st  not  encounter  rather  than  a  beetle." — R.  No.  126. 

Here  ai*e  tchom  and  v^hich  used  as  the  relatives  to  the 
same  noun;  and,  besides,  we  know  that  whom  can,  in  no 
case,  be  a  relative  to  irrational  creatures,  and,  in  this  case, 
the  author  is  speaking  of  such  creatiu'es  only.  '■'■Horror'''' 
is  not  a  thing  that  can  be  impressed  upon  another  thing 
so  as  to  be  seen.  HoiTor  is  'a  feeling  of  the  mind;  for, 
though  we  say  "  horror  was  visible  on  his  countenance,^^ 
we  clearly  mean  that  the  outward  signs  of  honor  were 
visible.  "We  cannot  see  hoiTor  as  we  can  defor7>dty.  It 
should  have  been  '•'•deformity  and  hideousness.'" 

"  To  cull  from  the  mass  of  mankind  those  individuals 
upon  which  the  attention  ought  to  be  most  employed.'' — • 
R.  No.  4. 

The  antecedent  belongs  to  rational  beings,  and,  there- 
fore, the  lohich  should  have  been  whom. 


196  /Specimens  of  liaise   Grammar. 

"  This  determination  led  me  to  Metissa,  the  daughter 
of  Chrisophilus,  ichose  person  was  at  least  without  de- 
formity."—R.  No.  35. 

The  person  of  ichich  of  the  two?  Not  of  the  old  papa, 
to  be  sure ;  and  yet  this  is  what  the  words  mean. 

"  To  persuade  them  who  are  entering  the  world,  that 
all  are  equally  vicious,  is  not  to  awaken  judgment." — R. 
No.  119. 

Those  persons  who  are  entering  the  world,  and  not 
any  particular  persons  of  whom  we  have  already  been 
speaking.  We  cannot  say  them  persons;  and,  therefore, 
this  sentence  is  incorrect. 

"  Of  these  pretenders,  it  is  fit  to  distinguish  those  who 
endeavor  to  deceive  from  them  who  are  deceived." — R. 
No.  189. 

"  I  have,  therefore,  given  a  place  to  what  may  not  be 
useless  to  them  whose  chief  ambition  is  to  please."^ — R, 
No.  34 

The  thems  in  these  two  sentences  should  be  those. 
But  '■'■them  who  are  deceived''  has  another  sort  of  error 
attached  to  it,  for  the  who,  remember,  is  not,  of  itself,  a 
nominative.  The  antecedent,  as  you  have  seen,  must  be 
taken  into  view.  This  antecedent,  must  be  the  persons, 
understood;  and  then  we  have  them  persons  are  deceived. 

"  Reason,  as  to  the  power  and  principles  of  it,  is  the 
common  gift  of  God  to  man." — L.  Introduction. 

The  it  may  relate  to  poxoer  as  well  as  to  reason.  There- 
fore, it  would  have  been  better  to  say,  "  Reason,  as  to  its 
power  and  piinciples ;"  for  if  clearness  is  always  neces- 
sary, how  necessary  must  it  be  in  the  teaching  of  logic  f 

"All  the  prudence  that  any  man  exerts  in  his  common 
concerns  of  life." — L.  Introduction. 

Any  m,an  means,  here,  the  same  as  7nen  in  general,  and 
the  concerns  mean  the  concerns  common  to  men  in  gen- 
eral ;  and  therefore  the  article  the  should  have  been  used 
instead  of  the  pronoun  his. 


Specimens  of  False  Grammar.  197 

"  It  gives  pain  to  the  mind  and  memory,  and  exposes 
the  unskillful  hearer  to  mingle  the  superior  and  inferior 
particulai's  together ;  it  leads  them  into  a  thick  wood  in- 
stead of  open  daylight,  and  places  them  in  a  labyi'inth 
instead  of  a  plain  path.'' — L.  Pai't  4,  Chap  2. 

The  grammar  is  clearly  bad ;  and  the  rhet07'ic  is  not 
quite  free  from  fault.  Labyrinth  is  the  opposite  of  plain 
path,  but  open  daylight  is  not  the  opposite  of  a  thick 
wood.  Open  plain  would  have  been  better  than  open 
daylight;  for  open  dayhght  may  exist  along  with  a  thick 
wood. 

VERBS. 

"  There  ai'e  many  things  which  we  every  day  see  others 
unable  to  perform,  and,  perhaps,  have  even  miscarried 
ourselves  in  attempting ;  and  yet  can  hardly  allow  to  be 
difficult."— R.  No.  122. 

This  sentence  has  in  it  one  of  the  greatest  of  faults. 
The  nominative  case  of  can  allow  is  not  clear  to  us. 
This  is  a  manner  too  elliptical.  "  We  can  hardly  allow 
them,,''  is  what  was  meant.  "^-n 

"A  man's  eagerness  to  do  that  good,  to  tohich  he  is  not 
called,  will  betray  him  into  crimes." — R.  No.  8. 

The  man  is  not  called  to  the  good,  but  to  do  the  good. 
It  is  not  my  business,  at  this  time,  to  criticise  the  opiniofis 
of  Doctor  Johnson;  but  I  cannot  refrain  from  just  re- 
marking upon  this  sentence,  that  it  contains  the  sum 
total  of  passive  obedience  and  nonresistaiice.  It  con- 
demns all  disinterested  zeal  and  everything  worthy  of  the 
name  of  patriotism.  1 

"  We  aie  not  compelled  to  toil  through  half  a  folio  to 
be  convmced  that  the  author  has  broke  his  promise." — R. 
No.  1. 

"The  Muses,  when  they  sung  before  the  tin-one  of 
Jupiter."— R.  No.  3. 

In  the  first  of  these,  the  past  time  is  used  where  the 


198  /Specimens  of  False   Grammar. 

passive  participle  ought  to  have  been  used ;  and  in  the 
second,  the  passive  participle  is  used  in  the  place  of  the 
past  time.     Broken  and  sang  were  the  proper  words. 

"  My  purpose  was.,  after  ten  months  more  spent  in  com- 
merce, to  haue  withdrawn  my  wealth  to  a  safer  country.'' 
-^R.  No.  120. 

The  purpose  was  present,  and  therefore  it  was  his  pur- 
pose to  xoithdraw  his  wealth. 

"A  man  may,  by  great  attention,  persuade  others  that 
he  really  has  the  qualities  that  he  presumes  to  boast ;  but 
the  hour  will  come  when  he  should  exert  them,  and  then 
whatever  he  enjoy  ed  in  praise,  he  must  suffer  in  reproach.''^ 
— R.  No.  20. 

Here  is  a  complete  confounding  of  times.  Instead  of 
should,  it  should  be  ought  to;  and  instead  of  enjoyed,  it 
should  be  may  have  enjoyed.  The  sense  is  bad,  too ;  for 
how  can  a  man  suffer  in  reproach  what  he  has  enjoyed  in 
praise? 

"He  had  taught  himself  to  think  riches  more  valua- 
ble than  natui-e  designed  them,  and  to  expect  from  them 
"— R.  No.  20. 

"I  could  prudently  adventure  an  inseparable  union.^^ — 
R.  No.  119. 

"I  propose  to  endeavor  the  entertainment  of  my  coun- 
trymen."— R.  No.  1. 

" He  may,  by  attending  the  remarks,  which  every  paper 
will  produce." — R.  No.  1. 

In  each  of  these  four  sentences,  a  neuter  verb  has  the 
powers  of  an  active  [transitive]  verb  given  to  it.  De- 
signed them  to  be;  adventm'e  on;  endeavor  to  entertain; 
attending  to."  To  design  a  thing  is  to  di'aw  it;  to 
attend  a  thing  is  to  wait  on  it.  No  case  occui's  to  me, 
at  present,  wherein  adventure  and  endeavor  can  be  active 
[transitive]  verbs;  but,  at  any  rate,  they  ought  not  to 
have  assumed  the  active  office  here. 

"jT  was  not  condemned  in  my  youth  to  solitude,  either 


/Specimens  of  liaise   Graintnar.  199 

by  indigence  or  deformity,  nor  passed  the  earlier  paxt  of 
life  without  the  flattery  of  courtship." — R.  No.  119. 

The  verb  cannot  change .  from  a  neuter  to  an  active 
"without  a  repetition  of  the  nominative.  It  should  have 
been,  nor  did  I  pass;  or,  nor  passed  I. 

"Anthea  loas  co7itent  to  call  a.  coach,  and  crossed  the 
brook."— R.  No.  34. 

It  should  be  '■'■she  crossed  the  brook." 

"He  will  be  welcomed  with  ardor,  sinless  he  destroys 
those  recommendations  by  his  faults." — R.  No.  160. 

"7/"  he  thinks  his  own  iudgment  not  sufficiently  en- 
lightened, he  may  rectify  his  opinions." — R.  No.  1. 

'■'■If  he  finds,  with  all  his  industry,  and  all  his  artifices, 
that  he  cannot  deserve  regai'd,  or  cannot  obtain  it,  he  may 
let  the  design  fall."— R.  No.  1. 

The  subjunctive  mode  ought  to  be  used  in  all  these 
three  sentences.  In  the  first,  the  meaning  is,  "unless  he 
shoidd  destroy."  In  the  last  two,  the  Doctor  is  speaking 
of  his  own  undertaking ;  and  he  means,  "  the  author,  if 
he  should  think,  if  he  shoidd  find;  may  then  rectify  his 
opinions;  may  then  let  fall  his  design."  He  therefore 
should  have  wiitten,  "if  he  think/  if  he^fitid."  > 

"Follow  solid  argument  wherever  it  leads  you"' — 
L.  Part  3. 

Wherever  it  may  lead  you,  shall  lead  you,  is  meant; 
and,  therefore,  the  subjunctive  mode  was  necessary.  It 
should  have  been,  "wherever  it  lead  you." 

"See,  therefore,  that  your  general  definitions,  or  de- 
scriptions, are  as  accurate  as  the  nature  of  the  thing  will 
bear ;  see  that  your  general  divisions  and  distributions  be 
just  and  exact;  see  that  yom*  axioms  be  sufficiently  evi- 
dent ;  see  that  your  principles  be  well  drawn." — L.  Part  4. 

All  these  members  are  coirect,  except  the  first,  where 
the  verb  is  put  in  the  indicative  mode  instead  of  the  sitb- 
junctive.  All  the  four  have  the  same  turn ;  they  are  all 
in  the  same  mode,  or  manner ;  they  should,  therefore,  all 


200  /Specimens  of  False  Grammar. 

have  had  the  verb  in  the  sam,e  form,.     They  all  required 
the  subjunctive  form. 


PARTICIPLES. 

"Or,  it  is  the  drawing  a  conclusion,  which  was  before 
either  unknown  or  dark." — L.  Introduction. 

It  should  be  "the  drawing  of  o.  conclusion;"  for,  in 
this  case,  the  active  participle  becomes  a  noun.  "The 
acl  of  drawing  "  is  meant,  and  clearly  understood ;  and  we 
cannot  say,  "the  act  draioing  a  conclusion."  When  the 
article  comes  before,  there  must  be  the  preposition  after 
the  participle.  To  omit  the  preposition  in  such  cases  is 
an  error  very  common,  and  therefore  I  have  noticed  the 
error  in  this  instance,  in  order  to  put  you  on  your  guard. 

ADVERBS. 

"For  thoughts  are  only  criminal  when  they  are  first 
chosen,  and  then  voluntarily  continued.'''' — R.  N.  8. 

The  station,  or  place,  of  the  adverb  is  a  great  matter. 
The  Doctor  does  not  mean  here  that  which  his  worlds 
mean.  He  means  that  "thoughts  are  criminal,  only  when 
they  are  first  chosen  and  then  voluntarily  continued."  As 
the  words  stand,  they  mean  that  "  thoughts  are  nothing 
else,  or  nothing  more,  than  criminal,"  in  the  case  supposed. 
But  here  are  other  words  not  very  properly  used.  I 
should  like  to  be  informed  how  a  thought  can  be  chosen; 
how  that  is  possible;  and  also  how  we  can  continue  a 
thought,  or  how  we  can  discontinue  a  thought  at  our  vyill. 
The  science  here  is  so  very  profound  that  we  cannot  see 
the  bottom  of  it.  Swift  says,  "  whatever  is  dark  is  deep. 
Stir  a  puddle,  and  it  is  deeper  than  a  well."  Doctor 
Johnson  deals  too  much  in  this  kind  of  profundity. 

There  is  no  word  in  our  language  more  frequently  misused  than 
this  word  oniy.  People  eonstantl)'  write  and  speak  such  sentences 


Specimens  of  F'ulse   Grammar.  201 

as  these  ;  "1  have  only  received  ten  dolhirs.  He  onlj^  sells  leather. 
He  only  speaks  French;"  and  so  on.  The  w^ord  only  must  be 
placed  next  to  the  vs^ord  wluch  it  modifies  :  I  have  received  only 
ten  dollars ;  he  sells  only  leather,  or  leather  only ;  he  speaks  only 
French.  As  the  sentences  stand  in  the  first  instance,  they  do  not 
mean  what  they  are  intended  to  mean :  the  first  means,  only 
received  not  spent  or  lost ;  the  second,  only  sells  leather,  never 
buys  any ;  the  third  only  speaks  French,  never  writes  it. 

"  I  have  heard  hov)  some  critics  have  been  pacified  with 
claret  aud  a  supper,  and  others  laid  asleep  with  the  soft 
notes  of  flattery." — R.  No.  1. 

How  means  the  manner  in  lohlch.  As,  '■'■JIow  do  you 
do?"  That  is,  '•/«  what  manner  do  you  carry  yourself 
on"^ "  But  the  Doctor  tells  us  here,  in  other  words,  the 
precise  manner  in  which  the  critics  were  pacified.  The 
hoio,  therefore,  should  have  been  that. 

"I  hope  not  much  to  tu'e  those  whom  I  shall  not  happen 
to  please." — R.  No.  1. 

He  did  not  mean  that  he  did  not  much  hope,  but  that 
he  hoped  not  to  tire  much.  "I  hope  I  shall  not  much 
tire  those  whom  I  may  not  happen  to  please."  This  was 
what  he  meant ;  but  he  does  not  say  it. 

'*And  it  is  a  good  judgment  alone  can  dictate  ]xo^y  far 
to  proceed  in  it  and  ichen  to  stop." — L.  Part  4. 

Doctor  Watts  is  speaking  here  of  writing.  In  such  a 
case  an  adverb,  like  how  far,  expressive  of  longitudinal 
space,  introduces  a  rhetorical  figure;  for  the  plain  mean- 
ing is,  that  judgment  will  dictate  how  much  to  icrite  on  it, 
and  not  hoiofar  to  jjroceed  in  it.  The  figure,  however,  is 
very  proper,  and  much  better  than  the  literal  words. 
But  when  a  figure  is  begun  it  should  be  carried  on 
throughout,  which  is  not  the  case  here;  for  the  Doctor 
begins  with  a  figure  of  longitudinal  space,  and  ends  with 
a  figure  of  time.  It  should  have  been  ^'-  where  to  stop." 
Or,  "how  long  to  px'oceed  in  it  and  %ohen  to  stop."  To 
tell  a  man  how  far  he  is  to  go  into  the  Western  countries 
of  America,  and  when  he  is  to  stop,  is  a  very  diflferent 
9* 


202  Specimens  of  False   Grammar. 

thing  from  telling  him  hovi  Jar  he  is  to  go  and  cohere  he 
is  to  stop.  I  have  dwelt  thus  on  this  distinction,  for  the 
purpose  of  putting  you  on  the  watch,  and  guarding  you 
against  confounding  figures.  The  less  you  use  them  the 
better,  till  you  understand  more  about  them. 

"jTn  searching  out  matters  of  fact  in  times  past  or  in 
distant  places,  in  which  case  moral  evidence  is  sufficient, 
and  moral  certainty  is  the  utmost  that  can  be  attained, 
here  we  derive  a  greater  assurance  of  the  truth  of  it  by  a 
number  of  persons,  or  multitude  of  circumstances,  con- 
curring to  bear  witness  to  it.'" — L.  Part  3. 

The  adverb  here  is  wholly  unnecessary,  and  it  does 
harm.  But  what  shall  we  say  of  the  of  it,  and  the  to  it  ? 
What  is  the  antecedent  of  the  it?  Is  matters  of  fact  the 
antecedent?  Then  them,  and  not  it,  should  have  been 
the  pronoun.  Is  evidence  the  antecedent  ?  Then  we  have 
circumstances  bearing  witness  to  evidence!  Is  certainty 
the  antecedent'?  Then  we  have  the  truth  of  certainty! 
Mind,  my  dear  James,  this  sentence  is  taken  from  a 
treatise  on  logic !  How  necessary  it  is,  then,  for  you  to 
be  careful  in  the  use  of  this  powerful  little  word  it! 

PREPOSITIONS. 

"And,  as  this  practice  is  a  commodious  subject  of  rail- 
lery to  the  gay,  and  of  declamation  to  the  serious,  it  has 

been  ridiculed " — R.  No.  123. 

With  the  gay ;  for  to  the  gay  means  that  the  raillery 
is  addressed  to  the  gay,  which  was  not  the  author's 
meaning. 

*'  When  I  was  deliberating  to  what  new  qualifications  I 
should  aspiie." — R.  No.  123. 

With  regard  to,  it  ought  to  have  been;  for  we  cannot 
deliberate  a  thing  nor  to  a  thing. 

"If  I  am  not  commended /'o/"  the  beauty  of  my  works, 
I  may  hope  to  be  pardoned  ^br  their  brevity." — R.  No.  1- 


iSpecimenit  of  liaise  Gravmiar.  203 

We  may  commend  him  for  the  beauty  of  his  works 
and  we  vaaj  pardon  himybr  theii*  brevity,  if  we  deem  the 
brevity  a  fault;  but  this  is  not  what  he  means.  He 
means  that,  at  any  rate,  he  shall  have  the  merit  of  brevity. 
"If  I  am  not  commended  for  the  beauty  of  my  works,  I 
may  hope  to  be  pardoned  on  account  of  their  brevity." 
This  was  what  the  Doctor  meant;  but  this  would  have 
marred  a  little  the  antithesis;  it  would  have  unsettled 
a  little  of  the  balance  of  that  see-saio  in  which  Dr.  Johnson 
so  much  delighted,  and  which,  falling  into  the  hands  of 
novel-writers  and  of  Members  of  Parliament,  has,  by 
moving  unencumbered  with  any  of  the  Doctor's  reason  or 
sense,  lulled  so  many  thousands  asleep!  Dr.  Johnson 
created  a  race  of  writers  and  speakers.  "Mi*.  Speaker, 
that  the  state  of  the  nation  is  very  critical,  all  men  must 
allow;  but  that  it  is  wholly  desperate,  few  men  will 
believe."  When  you  hear  or  see  a  sentence  hke  this,  be 
sure  that  the  person  who  speaks  or  writes  it  has  been 
reading  Dr.  Johnson,  or  some  of  his  imitators.  But,  ob- 
serve, these  imitators  go  no  further  than  the  frame  of  the 
sentence.  They,  in  general,  take  special  cai"e  not  to  imi- 
tate the  Doctor  in  knowledge  and  reasoning. 

I  have  now  lying  on  the  table  before  me  forty-eight 
errors,  by  Doctor  Watts,  in  the  use  or  omission  of  Prep- 
ositions. I  will  notice  but  two  of  them ;  the  first  is  an 
error  of  commission,  the  second  of  omission. 

"  When  we  would  prove  the  importance  of  any  scrip- 
tural doctrine  or  duty,  the  multitude  of  texts  wherein  it 
is  repeated  and  inculcated  upon  the  reader  seems  natu- 
rally to  insti'uct  us  that  it  is  a  matter  of  greater  import- 
ance than  other  things  which  aie  but  sUghtly  or  singly 
mentioned  in  the  Bible." — L.  Part  3. 

The  words  repeated  and  inculcated  both  apply  to  upon; 
but  we  cannot  repeat  a  thing  ujion  a  reader,  and  the 
words  here  used  mean  this.  When  several  verbs  or  par- 
ticiples are  joined  together  by  a  copulative  conjunction, 


204  Specimens  of  False   Grammar. 

care  must  be  taken  that  the  act  described  by  each  verb, 
or  participle,  be  such  as  can  be  performed  by  the  agent, 
and  performed,  too,  in  the  manner,  or  for  the  purpose,  or 
on  the  object,  designated  by  the  other  words  of  the  sen- 
tence. 

The  other  instance  of  error  in  the  use  of  the  Preposi- 
tion occurs  in  the  yerjjirst  sentence  in  the  Treatise  on 
Logic. 

"  Logic  is  the  art  of  using  reason  well  in  our  inquiries 
after  truth,  and  the  communication  of  it  to  others  " — L. 
Introduction. 

The  meaning  of  the  words  is  this:  that  '■'■Logie  is  the 
ai-t  of  using  reason  well  in  our  inquiries  after  truth,  and 
IS  also  the  communication  of  it  to  others."'  To  be  sure 
we  do  understand  that  it  means  that  "  Logic  is  the  art  of 
using  reason  well  in  our  inqviiries  after  truth,  and  in  the 
communication  of  it  to  others ;"  but,  sui'ely,  in  a  case  like 
this,  no  room  for  doubt,  or  for  hesitation,  ought  to  have 
been  left.  Nor  is  "using  reason  welV  a  well-chosen 
phrase.  It  may  mean  treating  it  xcell ;  not  ill-treating 
it.  '-  Using  reason  properly  or  employing  reason  well," 
would  have  been  better.  For,  observe,  Doctor  Watts  is 
here  giving  a  definition  of  the  thing  of  which  he  was 
about  to  treat;  and  he  is  speaking  to  persons  unac- 
quainted with  that  thing ;  for  as  to  those  acquainted  with 
it,  no  definition  was  wanted.  Clearness,  everywhere  de- 
sirable, was  here  absolutely  necessary. 

CONJUNCTIONS. 

'■'■As,  notwithstanding  all  that  wit,  or  malice,  or  pride, 
or  prudence,  will  be  able  to  suggest,  men  and  women 
must,  at  last,  pass  their  lives  together,  I  have  never,  there- 
fore, thought  those  wiiters  friends  to  human  happiness 
who  endeavor  to  excite  in  either  sex  a  general  contempt 
or  suspicion  of  the  other." — R.  No.  149. 


Specimens  of  False  Grammar.  205 

The  as  is  unnecessary ;  or  the  therefore  is  unnecessary. 

"  But  the  happy  historian  has  no  other  labor  than  of 
gathering  what  tradition  pours  down  before  him." — R. 
No.  122. 

"Some  have  advanced,  without  due  attention  to  the 
consequences  of  this  notion,  that  certain  virtues  have 
their  correspondent  faults,  and  therefore  to  exhibit  either 
aj)art  is  to  deviate  from  probability." — -R.  No.  4. 

"But  if  the  power  of  example  is  so  gieat  as  to  take 
possession  of  the  memory  by  a  kind  of  violence,  care 
ought  to  be  taken  that,  when  the  choice  is  unrestrained, 
the  best  examples  only  should  be  exhibited;  and  that 
lohich  is  likely  to  operate  so  strongly  should  not  be  mis- 
chievous or  vmcertain  in  its  effects." — R.  No.  4. 

It  should  have  been,  in  the  first  of  these  extracts,  "  than 
that  of  gathering ;"  in  the  second,  "  and  that  therefore ;" 
in  the  third,  "  and  that  that  which  is  likely."  If  the  Doc- 
tor wished  to  avoid  putting  tico  thats  close  together,  he 
should  have  chosen  another  form  for  his  sentence.  The 
that  which  is  a  relative,  and  the  conjunction  that  was 
required  to  go  before  it. 

"  It  is,  therefore,  a  useful  thing,  when  we  have  a  funda- 
mental truth,  we  use  the  synthetic  method  to  explain  it." 
— L.  Part  4. 

It  should  have  been  that  we  use,  or  to  use. 

WRONG  PLACING  OF  WORDS. 

Of  all  the  faults  to  be  found  in  writing,  this  is  one  of 
the  most  common,  and  perhaps  it  leads  to  the  greatest 
number  of  misconceptions.  All  the  words  may  be  the 
proper  words  to  be  used  uj)on  the  occasion ;  and  yet,  by 
a  misplaci7ig  of  a  part  of  them,  the  meaning  may  be 
wholly  destroyed ;  and  even  made  to  be  the  contrary  of 
what  it  ought  to  be. 

"  I  asked  the  question  with  no  other  intention  than  to 


206  J^ecimens  of  liaise  Grrammar. 

set  the  gentleman  free  from  the  necessity  of  silence,  and 
give  him  an  opportunity  of  mingling  on  equal  terms  with 
a  polite  assembly,  from  which,  hoviever  uneasy,  he  could 
not  then  escape,  hy  a  kind  introduction  of  the  only  sub- 
ject on  which  I  believed  him  to  be  able  to  speak  with 
propriety."— R.  No.  126. 

This  is  a  very  bad  sentence  altogether.  ^^Hoioever  uti- 
easy,'^  appUes  to  assembly,  and  not  to  gentleman.  Only 
observe  how  easily  this  might  have  been  avoided.  "  From 
which  he,  hoicever  uneasy,  could  not  then  escape."  After 
this  we  have  "Ae  could  not  then  escape,  by  a  kind  int7\>- 
dtcctiony  We  know  what  is  meant;  but  the  Doctor,  with 
all  his  commas,  leaves  the  sentence  confused.  Let  us  see 
whether  we  cannot  make  it  clear.  "  I  asked  the  question 
with  no  other  intention  than,  by  a  kind  introduction  of 
the  only  subject  on  which  I  beUeved  him  to  be  able  to 
speak  with  propriety,  to  set  the  gentleman  free  from  the 
necessity  of  silence,  and  to  give  him  an  opportunity  of 
mingling  on  equal  terms  with  a  polite  assembly,  fronx 
which  he,  however  uneasy,  could  not  then  escape," 

"  Reason  is  the  glory  of  human  nature,  and  one  of  the 
chief  eminences  whereby  we  are  raised  above  oui'  fellow- 
creatuies,  the  brutes,  in  this  lower  worlds — L.  Introduc- 
tion. 

1  have  before  showed  an  error  in  i\iQjirst  sentence  of 
Doctor  Watt's  work.  This  is  the  second  sentence.  The 
words,  "  in  this  lower  world,'"'  are  not  words  misplaced 
only;  they  are  wholly  unnecessary,  and  they  do  great 
harm;  for  they  do  these  two  things:  first,  they  imply 
that  there  are  brutes  in  the  higher  world;  and,  second, 
they  excite  a  doubt,  whether  %ce  are  raised  above  those 
brutes. 

I  might,  my  dear  James,  greatly  extend  the  number  of 
my  extracts  from  both  these  authors ;  but,  these,  I  ti'ust, 
are  enough.  I  had  noted  down  about  two  hundred  errors 
in  Doctor  Johnson's  Lives  of  the  Poets ;  but  afterwards 


/Specimens  of  liaise   Q-rammar.  207 

perceiving  that  he  had  revised  aud  corrected  the  Kambleb 
with  extraordinary  care,  I  chose  to  make  my  extracts 
from  that  work  rather  thau  fi'om  the  Lives  of  the  Poets. 


DOUBLE-NEGATIVE  AND  ELLIPSIS. 

Before  I  dismiss  the  si)ecimens  o£  bad  grammar,  I  wiU 
just  take,  from  Tull,  a  seuteuce nvhich  contains  striking 
instances  of  the  misapplication  of  Negatives,  and  of  the 
J^llipsis.  In  our  language  two  negatives  applied  to  the 
same  verhy  or  to  the  same  words  of  any  sort,  amount  to  an 
affinnative;  as,  "  J)o  not  give  him  none  of  jour  money." 
That  is  to  say,  ^^Glne  him  some  of  your  money,"  though 
the  contrary  is  meant.  It  should  be,  "Z>o  not  give  him 
any  of  yom*  money."  Errors,  as  to  this  matter,  occur 
most  frequently  when  the  sentence  is  formed  in  such  a 
manner  as  to  lead  the  writer  out  of  sight  and  out  of 
sound  of  the  first  negative  before  he  comes  to  the  point 
where  he  thinks  a  second  is  requu'ed ;  as,  '•'■Neither  Rich- 
ai'd  nor  Peter,  as  I  have  been  informed,  and  indeed  as  it 
has  been  proved  to  me,  never  gave  James  authority  to 
write  to  me."  You  see  it  ought  to  be  ever.  But  in  this 
case,  as  in  most  others,  there  requires  nothing  more  than 
a  little  thought.  You  see  clearly  that  two  negatives,  ap- 
plied to  the  same  verb,  destroy  the  negative  eifect  of  each 
other.  "I  will  noi  ?«eyer  write."  This  is  the  contrary  of 
"I  xcill  never  write." 

The  Ellipsis,  of  which  I  spoke  in  Letter  XIX,  paragraph 
227,  ought  to  be  used  with  great  care.  Read  that  para- 
graph again ;  and  then  attend  to  the  following  sentence  of 
Mr.  Tull,  which  I  select  in  order  to  show  you  that  vei-y 
fine  thoughts  may  be  greatly  marred  by  a  too  free  use  of 
the  EUipsis. 

"It  is  strange  that  no  author  should  neoer  have  wi-itten 
fidly  of  the  fabric  of  ploughs !  Men  of  greatest  learning 
have  spent  their  time  in  contriving  instruments  to  measure 


208  ^ecimens  of  Kalse  Grammar. 

the  immense  distance  of  the  stars,  and  in  finding  out  the 
dimensions  and  even  weight  of  the  planets.  They  think 
it  more  eligible  to  study  the  art  of  ploughing  the  sea 
with  ships  than  of  tilling  the  land  with  ploughs.  They 
bestow  the  utmost  of  theu'  skill,  learnedly  to  pervert  the 
natural  use  of  all  the  elements  for  destruction  of  their 
own  species  by  the  bloody  art  of  war ;  and  some  waste 
their  whole  lives  in  studying  how  to  ai'm  death  with  new 
engines  of  horror,  and  inventing  an  infinite  variety  of 
slaughter;  but  think  it  beneath  men  of  learnmg  (who 
only  are  capable  of  doing  it)  to  employ  their  learned 
labors  in  the  invention  of  new,  or  even  improving  the 
old,  instruments ^/br  increasing  of  bread." 

You  see  the  never  ought  to  be  ever.  You  see  that  the 
the  is  left  out  before  the  word  greatest,  and  again  before 
weight,  and,  in  this  last-mentioned  instance,  the  leaving 
of  it  out  makes  the  words  mean  the  '''■even  weight;"  that 
IS  to  say,  not  the  odd  weight ;  instead  of  "  even  the 
weight,"  as  the  author  meant.  The  pronoun  that  is  left 
out  before  "of  tilling ;"  before  destruction,  the  article 
the  IS  again  omitted  i  in  is  left  out  before  inventing,  and 
also  before  improving;  and,  at  the  close,  the  is  left  out 
before  increasing.  To  see  so  fine  a  sentence  marred  in 
this  way  is,  I  hope,  quite  enough  to  guai'd  you  against 
the  frequent  commission  of  similar  errors. 

We  of  tea  see  the  word  alone  wrongly  used  for  only;  as,  "To 
which  1  am  not  alone  bound  by  honor,  but  by  law ;"  but  Mr.  Tull 
OSes  only  instead  of  alone.  He  should  have  said,  "who  alone  are 
capable  of  doing  it." 


Errors  and  Nonsense,  etc.  209 


LETTER    XXII. 

ERRORS    AND    NONSENSE    IN    A    KING's    SPEECH. 

My  dear  James: 

In  my  fii'st  Letter,  I  obsei'ved  to  you  that  to  the  func- 
tions of  statesmen  and  legislators  was  due  the  highest 
respect  which  could  be  shown  by  man  to  anything  human ; 
but  I,  at  the  same  time,  observed  that,  as  the  degree  and 
quality  of  our  respect  rose  in  proportion  to  the  influence 
which  the  different  branches  of  knowledge  natui'ally  had 
in  the  affairs  and  on  the  conditions  of  men,  so,  in  cases  of 
imperfection  in  knowledge,  or  of  negligence  in  the  appli- 
cation of  it,  or  of  its  perversion  to  bad  pm-poses,  all  the 
feelings  opposite  to  that  of  respect  rose  in  the  same  pro- 
portion ;  and  to  one  of  these  cases  I  have  now  to  direct 
your  attention 

The  speeches  of  the  king  are  read  by  him  to  the  Parlia- 
ment. They  are  composed  by  his  ministers  or  select 
councillors.  They  are  documents  of  great  importance, 
treating  of  none  but  weighty  matters;  they  are  always 
Btyled  Most  Gracious,  and  ai"e  heard  and  answered  witk 
the  most  profound  respect. 

The  persons  who  settle  upon  what  shall  be  the  topics 
of  these  speeches,  and  who  diaw  the  speeches  up,  are  a 
Lord  High  Chancellor,  a  First  Lord  of  the  Treasury,  a 
Lord  President  of  the  Council,  thi'ee  Secretaries  of  State, 
a  Fii'st  Lord  of  the  Admii-alty,  a  Master  Genenal  of  the 
Ordnance,  a  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  and  perhaps 
one  or  two  besides.  These  persons  ai'e  called,  when 
spoken  of  in  a  body,  the  Ministri/.  They  are  all  members 
ot  the  kings  constitutional  coimcil,  called  the  Privy 
Council,  without  whose  assent  the  king  can  issue  no 
proclamation  nor  any  order  affecting  the  people.  This 
council.  Judge  Blackstone,  taking  the  words  of  Coke,  calls 


210  Errors  and  Nonsense 

"a  nohle^  honorable,  and  reverend  assembly."  So  that,  in 
the  Ministry,  who  are  selected  from  the  persons  who  com- 
pose this  assembly,  the  nation  has  a  right  to  expect  some- 
thing very  near  to  perfection  in  point  of  judgment  and  of 
practical  talent. 

How  destitute  of  judgment  and  of  practical  talent  these 
persons  have  been,  in  the  capacity  of  statesmen  and  of 
legislators,  the  present  miserable  and  perilous  state  of 
England  amply  demonstrates;  and  I  am  now  about  to 
show  you  that  they  are  equally  destitute  in  the  capacity 
of  writers.     There  is  some  poet  who  says, 

"  Of  all  the  arts  in  wliich  the  learn'd  excel, 
The  first  in  rank  is  that  of  loriting  well. "  * 

And  though  a  man  may  possess  great  knowledge,  as  a 
statesman  and  as  a  legislator,  without  being  able  to  per- 
form what  this  poet  would  call  writing  well;  yet,  surely, 
we  have  a  right  to  expect  in  a  minister  the  capacity  of 
being  able  to  write  grammatically ;  the  capacity  of  put- 
ting his  own  meaning  clearly  down  upon  paper.  But,  in 
the  composing  of  a  king's  speech,  it  is  not  one  man,  but 
nine  men,  whose  judgment  and  practical  talent  are  em- 
ployed. A  king's  speech  is,  too,  a  very  short  piece  of 
writing.  The  to^Dics  aie  all  distinct.  Very  little  is  said 
upon  each.  There  is  no  reasoning.  It  is  all  plain  matter 
of  fact,  or  of  simple  observation.  The  thing  is  done  with 
all  the  advantages  of  abundant  time  for  examination  and 
re-examination.  Each  of  the  ministers  has  a  copy  of  the 
speech  to  read,  to  examine,  and  to  obsen^e  upon;  and 
when  no  one  has  anything  left  to  suggest  in  the  way  of 
alteration  or  improvement,  the  speech  is  agreed  to,  and 
put  into  the  mouth  of  the  king. 

Surely,  therefore,  if  in  any  human  effort  perfection  can 
be  expected,  we  have  a  right  to  expect  it  in   a  king's 

•  Of  all  those  arts  in  which  the  wise  excel, 
Nature's  chief  ma.sterpiece  is  writing  well. 

Sheffield,  Earl  of  Bitckinghamshire. 


Jn  a  King's  Speech.  211 

speech.  You  shall  now  see,  then,  what  pretty  stuff  is 
put  together,  and  delivered  to  the  Parliament,  under  the 
name  of  king's  speeches. 

The  speech  which  I  am  about  to  examine  is,  indeed,  a 
speech  of  the  regent ;  but  I  might  take«any  other  of  these 
speeches.  I  choose  tbis  particular  speech  because  the 
subjects  of  it  are  familiar  in  America  as  well  as  in  "England. 
It  was  spoken  on  the  8th  of  November,  1814.  I  shall 
take  a  sentence  at  a  time,  in  order  to  avoid  confusion. 

*•  My  Lords  and  Gentlemen :  It  is  with  deep  regret  that 
/  am  again  obliged  to  announce  the  continuance  of  his 
majesty's  lamented  indisposition." 

Even  in  this  short  sentence  there  is  something  equiv- 
ocal; for  it  7nay  be  that  the  prince's  regret  aiises  from 
his  being  obliged  to  announce,  and  not  from  the  thing 
annoimced.  If  he  had  said,  "With  deep  regret  I  an- 
nounce," or,  "I  announce  with  deep  regret,"  there  would 
have  been  nothing  equivocal.  And,  in  a  composition  like 
this,  all  ought  to  be  as  clear  as  the  pebbled  brook. 

"It  would  have  give7i  me  great  satisfaction  to  have  been 
enabled  to  communicate  to  you  the  termination  of  the  war 
between  this  country  and  the  United  States  of  America." 

The  double  compound  times  of  the  verbs,  in  the  first 
part  of  the  sentence,  make  the  wo^^ds  mean  that  it  would, 
before  the  prince  came  to  the  House,  have  given  him  gi'eat 
satisfaction  to  be  enabled  to  communicate;  whereas  he 
meant,  "  It  would  now  have  given  me  great  satisfaction  to 
be  enabled  to  communicate."  In  the  latter  pai't  of  the 
sentence  we  have  a  httle  nonsense.  What  does  termina- 
tion mean?  It  means,  in  this  case,  end  or  conclusioii; 
and  thus  the  prince  wished  to  communicate  an  end  to  the 
wise  men  by  whom  he  was  siuTounded !  To  communicate 
is  to  impart  to  another  any  thing  that  we  have  in  our 
possession  or  within  our  power.  And  so,  the  prince 
wished  to  impart  the  end  to  the  noble  lords  and  honorable 
gentlemen.     He  might  wish  to  impart,  or  communicate 


212  Errors  and  Nonsense 

the  news^  or  the  intelligence  of  the  end;  but  he  could 
not  communicate  the  end  itself.  What  should  we  say,  if 
some  one  were  to  tell  us,  that  an  officer  had  arrived,  and 
brought  home  the  termination  of  a  battle,  and  carried  it 
to  Carlton  House  and  communicated  it  to  the  prince? 
We  should  laugh  at  our  informant's  ignorance  of  gram- 
mar, though  we  should  understand  what  he  meant.  And, 
shall  we,  then,  be  so  partial  and  so  unjust  as  to  reverence 
in  king's  councillors  that  which  we  should  laugh  at  in  one 
of  our  neighbors  ?  To  act  thus  would  bee  my  dear  son,  a 
base  abandonment  of  our  reason,  which  is,  to  use  the 
words  of  Dr.  Watts,  the  common  gift  of  God  to  man. 

^'^ Although  this  war  originated  in  the  most  unprovoked 
aggression  on  tlie  part  of  the  Government  of  the  United 
States,  and  was  calculated  to  promote  the  designs  of  the 
common  enemy  of  Europe  against  the  rights  and  inde- 
pendence of  all  other  nations,  I  never  have  ceased  to 
entertain  a  sincere  desire  to  bring  it  to  a  conclusion  on 
Just  atid  honorable  terms.'''' 

The  the  most  would  lead  us  to  suppose  that  there  had 
been  more  than  one  aggression,  and  that  the  war  origi- 
nated in  the  most  vmprovoked  of  them;  whereas  the 
prince's  meaning  was  that  the  aggi*ession  was  an  unpro- 
voked one,  unprovoked  in  the  superlative  degree;  and 
that,  therefore,  it  was  a  tnost  unprovoked  aggression. 
The  words  all  other  nations  may  mean  all  nations  except 
England;  or,  all  nations  out  of  Europe;  or,  all  nations 
other  than  the  United  States;  or,  all  nations  except  the 
enemy's  own  nation.  Guess  you  which  of  these  is  the 
meaning ;  I  confess  that  I  am  wholly  unable  to  determine 
the  question.  But,  what  does  the  close  of  the  sentence 
mean  when  taken  into  view  with  the  although  at  the 
beginning'?  Does  the  prince  mean  that  he  would  be 
justified  in  wanting  to  make  peace  on  unjust  and  dis- 
honorable terms  because  the  enemy  had  been  the  ag- 
gressor?    He  might,  indeed,  wish  to  make  it  on  terms 


In  a  King's  Speech.  213 

dishouorable,  aiid  even  disgraceful,  to  the  enemy;  but 
could  he  possibly  wish  to  make  it  on  unjust  terms?  Does 
he  mean  that  an  aggression,  however  wicked  and  unpro- 
voked, would  give  him  a  right  to  do  injustice?  Yet,  if 
he  do  not  mean  this,  what  does  he  mean  ?  Perhaps  (for 
there  is  no  certainty)  he  may  mean  that  he  wishes  to 
bring  the  war  to  a  conclusion  as  soon  as  he  can  get  just 
and  honorable  terms  from  the  enemy y'  but,  then,  what  is 
he  to  do  with  the  although?  Let  us  try  this:  "I  am 
ready,"  say  you,  "to  make  peace,  if  you  loill  give  me  just 
terms,  although  you  are  the  aggressor.'''  To  be  sure  you 
are,  whether  J  be  the  aggressor  or  not!  All  that  you  can 
possibly  have  the  face  to  ask  of  me  is  justice;  and,  there- 
fore, why  do  you  connect  your  wish  for  peace  with  this 
althottgh?  Either  you  mean  that  my  aggression  gives 
you  a  right  to  demand  of  me  more  than  justice,  or  you 
talk  nonsense.  Nor  must  we  overlook  the  word  "  govern- 
ment"  which  is  introduced  here.  In  the  sentence  before, 
the  prmce  wished  to  communicate  the  end  of  the  war 
between  '''•this  country  and  the  United  States;''"'  but  in. 
this  sentence  we  ai'e  at  war  with  "the  Government  of  the 
United  States."  This  was  a  poor  trick  of  sophistry,  and 
as  such  we  will  let  it  pass;  only  observing  that  such 
low  trickery  is  not  very  becoming  in  men  selected  from 
"a  noble,  honorable,  and  reverend  assembly." 

"I  am  still  engaged  in  negotiations  for  this  purpose." 

That  is,  the  purpose  of  bringing  the  war  to  a  conclusion. 
A  very  good  pui-pose;  but  why  still?  He  had  not  told 
his  nobles  and  his  boroughmen  that  he  had  been  engaged 
in  negotiations.  Even  this  short,  simple  sentence  covdd 
not  be  made  without  fault. 

"The  success  of  them  must,  however,  depend  on  my 
disposition  being  met  with  corresponding  sentiments  on 
the  part  of  the  enemy." 

Now,  suppose  I  were  to  say,  "  My  wagon  was  met  with 
Mr.  Tredw ell's  coach."     Would  you  not  tliink  that  some- 


214  Errors  and  Nonsense 

body  liad  met  the  wagon  and  coach,  both  going  together 
the  same  way?  To  be  sure  you  would.  But  if  I  were  to 
say,  "My  wagon  was  met  by  Mr.  Tredwell's  coach,"  you 
would  think  that  they  had  approached  each  other  from 
different  spots.  And,  therefore,  the  prince  should  have 
Baid,  "met  6y."  This  sentence,  however,  short  as  it  hap- 
jjUy  is,  is  too  long  to  be  content  with  one  en'or.  Dispo- 
sition, in  this  sense  of  the  word,  means  state,  or  bent,  or 
temper,  of  mind;  and  the  word  sentiments  means  thoughts, 
or  opifiions.  So,  here  we  have  a  temper  of  mind  met  by 
thoughts.  Thoughts  may  correspond  or  agree  with  a  tem- 
per of  mind  ;  but  how  are  they  to  meet  it  ?  If  the  prince 
had  said,  "  My  disposition  being  met  by  a  coiTCsponding 
disposition  on  the  part  of  the  enemy,"  he  would  have 
uttered  plain  and  dignified  language. 

"The  operations  of  his  majesty's  forces  by  sea  a7id 
land  in  the  Chesapeake,  in  the  course  of  the  present  year, 
have  been  attended  with  most  brilHant  and  successful 
results." 

Were  there  only  the  bad  placing  of  the  different  mem- 
bers of  this  sentence,  the  fault  would  be  sufficient.  But 
we  do  not  know  whether  the  prince  means  operations  by 
sea  and  land,  ov  forces  by  sea  and  land. 

It  seems  to  me  there  is  another  en"or  here.  The  prince  speaks 
of  operations  of  "forces  by  sea  and  land  in  the  Chesapeake."  The 
Chesapeake  is  a  bay.  How  can  there  be  operations  of  forces  by 
land  in  tlie  Chesapeake?  Does  he  mean  the  operations  of  the  forces 
when  they  got  to  the  bottom  of  the  bay  ? 

"  The  flotilla  of  the  enemy  in  the  Patuxent  has  been 
destroyed.  The  signal  defeat  of  their  land  forces  enabled 
a  detachment  of  his  majesty's  army  to  take  possession  ot 
the  city  of  Washington  ;  and  the  spii'it  of  enterprise,  which 
has  characterized  all  the  movements  in  this  quarter,  has 
produced  on  the  inhabitants  a  deep  and  sensible  impres- 
sion of  the  calamities  of  a  war  in  which  they  have  been  so 
wantonly  involved." 


In  a  King's  Speech.  215 

Enemy  is  not  a  noun  of  multitude,  like  gang  or  Iloust 
of  Commona,  or  den  of  thieves;  and,  therefore,  when  used 
in  the  singular,  must  have  singular  pronouns  and  verbs 
to  agree  with  it.  Their,  in  the  second  of  these  sentences, 
should  have  been  his.  A  sensible  impression  is  an  impres- 
sion felt;  a  deep  impression  is  one  more  felt.  Therefore 
it  was  "a  sensible  and  deejy  impression."  But,  mdeed, 
sensible  had  no  business  there ;  for  an  impression  that  is 
deep  must  be  sensible.  What  would  you  think  of  a  man 
who  should  say,  "  I  have  not  only  been  stabbed,  but  my 
skin,  has  been  cut  f  Why,  you  would  thiak,  to  be  sure, 
that  he  must  be  a  man  selected  from  the  noble,  honorable, 
and  reverend  assembly  at  Whitehall ! 

.  "  The  expedition  directed  fi"om  Halifax  to  the  northern 
coast  of  the  United  States  has  terminated  in  a  manner 
not  less  satisfactory."' 

Than  what?  The  prince  has  told  us,  before  this,  of 
nothing  that  has  terminated  satisfactorily.  He  has  talked 
of  a  brilliant  result,  and  of  an  impression  made  on  the 
inhabitants;  but  of  no  termination  has  he  talked;  nor 
has  he  said  a  word  about  satisfaction.  W^e  must  always 
take  care  how  we  use,  in  one  sentence,  words  which  refer 
to  anything  said  in  former  sentences. 

"  The  successful  coui-se  of  this  operation  has  been  fol- 
lowed by  the  immediate  submission  of  the  extensive  and 
important  district  east  of  the  Penobscot  river  to  his  maj- 
esty's arm:<.'''' 

This  sentence  is  a  disgrace  even  to  a  ministry  Avith  a 
Jenkinson  at  its  head.  "S^Tiat  do  they  mean  by  a  course 
hemg  followed  by  a  submission?  And  then,  '•'■  has  been 
followed  by  the  immediate  submission"?"  One  would 
think  that  some  French  emigrant  priest  was  employed  to 
wiite  this  speech.  He,  indeed,  would  say,  "a  ete  suivie 
par  la  soumission  immediate."  But  when  we  make  use 
of  any  word  Hke  immediate,  which  carries  us  back  to  the 
time  and  scene  of  action,  we  must  use  the  past  tinie  of 


216  071  Putting  Sentences   l^ogether, 

the  verb,  and  say,  '■'■was  followed  by  the  immediate  sub- 
luission."  That  is  to  say,  was  then  followed  by  the  then 
immediate ;  and  not  has  now  been  followed  by  the  then 
immediate  submission.  The  close  of  this  sentence  exhibits 
a  fine  instance  of  want  of  skill  in  the  placing  of  the  parts 
of  a  sentence.  Could  these  noble  and  reverend  persons 
find  no  place  but  the  end  for  "  to  his  majesty^ s  arms  V 
There  was,  but  they  could  not  see  it,  a  place  made  on 
purpose,  after  the  word  submission. 

It  is  unnecessary,  my  dear  James,  for  me  to  proceed 
fm-ther  with  an  exposui-e  of  the  bad  grammar  and  the 
nonsense  of  this  speech.  There  is  not,  in  the  whole 
speech,  one  single  sentence  that  is  free  from  error.  Nor 
A\ill  you  be  at  all  siu'prised  at  this,  if  ever  you  should 
hear  those  persons  uttering  their  oton  speeches  in  those 
places  which,  when  you  were  a  naughty  little  boy,  you 
used  to  call  the  '■'Thieves'  Houses.'"  If  you  should  ever 
hear  them  there,  stammering  and  repeating  and  putting 
forth  then-  nonsense,  your  wonder  will  be,  not  that  they 
Avrote  a  king's  speech  so  badly,  but  that  they  contrived  to 
put  upon  paper  sentences  sufficiently  grammatical  to  en- 
able us  to  guess  at  the  meaning. 


LETTER   XXIII. 

on  putting  sentences  togethek,  and  on  figurative 
language. 
My  dear  James: 

I  have  now  done  with  the  subject  of  grammai',  which, 
as  you  know,  teaches  us  to  use  words  in  a  proper  manner. 
But  though  you  now,  I  hope,  understand  how  to  avoid 
eiTor  in  the  forming  of  sentences,  I  think  it  right  not  to 
conclude  my  instructions  without  saying  a  few  words 
upon  the  subject  of  adding  sentence  to  sentence,  and  on 
the  subject  of  figurative  language. 


and  on  Figurative  Language  217 

Language  is  made  use  of  for  one  of  three  pui-posea; 
namely,  to  iufoi-m,  to  convince,  or  to  persuade.  The 
first,  requii'ing  merely  the  talent  of  telling  what  we  know, 
is  a  matter  of  little  difficulty.  The  second  demands  rea- 
soning. The  third,  besides  reasoning,  demands  all  the 
aid  that  we  can  obtain  from  the  use  of  figures  of  speech, 
or,  as  they  are  sometimes  called,  figures  of  rhetoric,  which 
last  word  means  the  power  of  persuasion. 

Whatever  may  be  the  pm-pose  for  which  we  use  lan- 
guage, it  seldom  can  happen  that  we  do  not  stand  in 
need  of  more  than  one  sentence;  and,  therefore,  others 
must  be  added.  There  is  no  precise  rule;  there  can  be 
no  precise  rule,  with  regard  to  the  manner  of  doing  this. 
WTien  we  have  said  one  thing,  we  must  add  another ;  and 
so  on,  until  we  have  said  all  that  we  have  to  say.  But  we 
ought  to  take  care,  and  great  cai-e,  that  if  any  words  in  a 
sentence  relate,  in  any  way,  to  words  that  have  gone  be- 
fore, we  make  these  words  correspond  grammatically 
with  those  foregoing  words;  an  instance  of  the  want  of 
which  care  you  have  seen  in  paragraph  178. 

The  order  of  the  matter  will  be,  in  almost  all  cases, 
that  of  youi"  thoughts.  Sit  down  to  write  what  you  have 
thought,  and  not  to  think  ichat  you  shall  write.  Use  the 
first  words  that  occur  to  you,  and  never  attempt  to  alter 
a  thought;  for  that  which  has  come  of  itself  into  yom* 
mind  is  likely  to  pass  into  that  of  another  more  readily 
aaid  with  more  effect  than  anything  which  you  can,  by 
reflection,  invent. 

Never  stop  to  make  choice  of  words.  Put  down  your 
thought  in  words  just  as  they  come.  Follow  the  order 
which  yoTir  thought  will  point  out ;  and  it  will  push  you 
on  to  get  it  upon  the  paper  as  quickly  and  as  clearly  as 
possible. 

Thoughts  come  much  faster  than  we  can  put  them 
upon  paper.  They  produce  one  another:  and  the  order 
of  their  coming  is,  in  almost  every  case,  the  best  possible 
10 


218  On   Putting  Sentences    Together, 

order  that  they  can  have  on  paper;  yet,  if  you  have 
several  in  youi*  mind,  rising  above  each  other  in  point  of 
force,  the  most  forcible  will  natui'ally  come  the  last  upon 
paper. 

Mr.  Lindley  MvuTay  gives  rides  about  long  sentences 
and  short  sentences,  and  about  a  due  mixture  of  long  and 
short;  and  he  also  gives  i-ules  about  the  letters  that  sen- 
tences should  begin  with,  and  the  syllables  that  they 
should  €7id  with.  Such  rules  might  be  very  well  if  we 
were  to  sing  om-  wiiting;  but  when  the  use  of  writing 
is  to  infortn,  to  convince.,  or  to  persuade,  what  can  it 
have  to  do  with  such  rules  ? 

There  are  certain  connecting  words  which  it  is  of  im- 
portance to  use  properly;  such  as  therefore,  which  means 
for  that  cause,  for  that  reason.  We  must  take  care, 
when  we  use  such  words,  that  there  is  occasion  for  using 
them.  We  must  take  care  that  when  we  use  but,  or  for, 
or  any  other  connecting  word,  the  sense  of  our  sentences 
requires  such  word  to  be  used ;  for,  if  such  words  be  im- 
properly used,  they  throw  all  into  confusion.  You  have 
seen  the  shameful  effect  of  an  although  in  the  king's 
speech,  which  I  noticed  in  my  last  Letter.  The  adverbs 
when,  then,  while,  now.,  there,  and  some  others,  are  con- 
necting words,  and  not  used  in  then*  strictly  literal  sense. 
For  example:  "Well,  then,  I  will  not  do  it."  llieii,  in  its 
literal  sense,  means,  at  that  time,  or  in,  that  time;  as,  "  I 
was  in  America  then.'''  But  "  Well,  then,''  means,  "  Well, 
if  that  be  so,''  or  '■'■let  that  be  so,"  or  "//?-  that  case."  You 
have  only  to  accustom  yom-self  a  little  to  rellect  on  the 
meaning  of  these  words;  for  that  will  soon  teach  you 
never  to  employ  them  improperly. 

A  writmg,  or  written  discourse,  is  generally  broken  into 
paragraphs.  When  a  new  paragraph  should  begin,  the 
nature  of  your  thoughts  must  tell  you.  The  proj)riety  of 
it  will  be  pointed  out  to  you  by  the  difference  between 
the  thoughts  that  are  coming  and  those  which  have  gone 


and  on  Figurative  Language.  211) 

before.  It  is  impossible  to  frame  rules  for  regulating 
such  divisions.  "Wlien  a  man  divides  his  work  into  Parts, 
Books,  Chapters,  and  Sections,  he  makes  the  division 
according  to  that  which  the  matter  has  taken  in  his  mind ; 
and,  Avhen  he  comes  to  write,  he  has  no  other  guide  for 
the  distribution  of  his  matter  into  sentences  and  para- 
graphs 

Never  xcrite  about  any  matter  that  you  do  not  well 
understand.  If  you  cleai'ly  understand  all  about  your 
matter,  you  will  never  want  thoughts,  and  thoughts 
instantly  become  words. 

One  of  the  greatest  of  all  faults  in  writing  and  in  speak- 
ing is  this :  the  using  of  many  words  to  say  little.  In 
order  to  guai'd  yourself  against  this  fault,  inquire  what  is 
the  substance  or  amount  of  what  you  have  said.  Take  a 
long  speech  of  some  talking  lord,  and  put  down  upon 
paper  what  the  amount  of  it  is.  You  will  most  likely 
find  that  the  amount  is  very  small;  but,  at  any  rate,  when 
you  get  it,  you  will  then  be  able  to  examine  it,  and  to  tell 
what  it  is  worth.  A  very  few  examinations  of  this  sort 
will  so  frighten  you,  that  you  will  be  forever  after  upon 
yoTir  guaid  against  talking  a  great  deal  and  saying  little. 

Figurative  language  is  very  fine  when  properly  em- 
ployed; but  figvu'es  of  rhetoric  ai'e  edge-tools,  and  two- 
edged  tools,  too.  Take  care  how  you  touch  them !  They 
are  called  Jigxires.,  because  they  represent  other  things 
than  the  words  in  their  literal  meaning  stand  for.  For 
instance:  "The  tyiants  oppress  and  starve  the  people. 
The  people  would  live  amidst  abundance,  if  those  cormo- 
rants did  not"  devour  ih.Q  fruit  of  their  labor."  I  shall 
only  observe  to  you,  upon  this  subject,  that,  if  you  use 
figru-es  of  rhetoric,  you  ought  to  take  care  that  they  do 
not  make  nonsense  of  what  you  say;  nor  excite  the  ridi- 
cule of  those  to  whom  you  write.  ]\Ir.  Murray,  in  an 
address  to  his  students,  tells  them  "  that  he  is  about  to 
ofi"er  them  some  advice  with  retrard  to  their  future  walks 


220  On  Puttiug  Sentences  Together, 

ill  the  paths  of  literature."  Now,  though  a  man  may  take 
a  walk  along  a  path,  a  walk  means  also  the  ground  laid 
out  in  a  certain  shajie,  and  such  a  walk  is  wider  than  a 
path.  He,  in  another  part  of  this  addi'ess,  tells  them 
that  they  are  in  the  morning  of  life,  anc"  that  that  is  the 
season  for  exertion.  The  morniag,  my  dear  James,  is  not 
a  season.  The  year,  indeed,  has  seasons,  but  the  day  has 
none.  If  he  had  said  the  sjyring  of  hfe,  then  he  might 
have  added  the  season  of  exertion.  I  told  you  they  were 
edge-tools.     Beware  of  them. 

I  am  now,  my  dear  son,  ariived  at  the  last  paragraph 
of  my  treatise,  and  I  hope  that,  when  you  arrive  at  it, 
you  will  understand  grammar  sufficiently  to  enable  you 
to  write  without  committing  frequent  and  glaring  errors. 
I  shall  now  leave  you,  for  about  four  months,  to  read  and 
write  English ;  to  jjractise  what  you  have  now  been  taught. 
At  the  end  of  those  four  months  I  shall  have  prepared  a 
Grammar  to  teach  you  the  French  language,  which  lan- 
guage I  hope  to  hear  you  speak,  and  to  see  you  write 
well,  at  the  end  of  one  year  from  this  time.  With  English 
and  French  on  your  tongue  and  in  your  pen,  you  have  a 
resoirrce  not  only  greatly  valuable  in  itself,  but  a  resource 
that  you  can  be  deprived  of  by  none  of  those  changes  and 
chances  which  deprive  men  of  pecuniary  possessions,  and 
which,  in  some  cases,  make  the  piu"se-proud  man  of  yes- 
terday a  crawling  sycophant  to-day.  Health,  without 
which  Ufe  is  not  worth  having,  you  will  hardly  fail  to 
secure  by  early  rising,  exercise,  sobriety,  and  abstemious- 
ness as  to  food.  Happmess,  or  misery,  is  in  the  mind. 
It  is  the  mind  that  lives ;  and  the  length  of  life  ought  to 
be  measui-ed  by  the  number  and  importance  of  our  ideas, 
and  not  by  the  number  of  our  days.  JNever,  therefore, 
esteem  men  merely  on  account  of  their  riches  or  theii 
station.  Respect  goodness,  find  it  where  you  may. 
Honor  talent  wherever  you  behold  it  unassociated  with 
Tice ;  but  honor  it  most  when  accompanied  with  exertion. 


and  OH  Figurative  Language.  221 

aiid  especially  when  exerted  in  the  cause  of  truth  and 
justice ;  and,  above  all  things,  hold  it  in  honor  when  it 
steps  forward  to  protect  defenceless  innocence  against 
the  attacks  of  powerful  guilt. 

It  is  true  that  figures  are  edge-tools;  but  even  edge-tools  are 
perfectly  safe  in  the  hands  of  those  who  know  how  to  use  them. 
And  with  a  little  care  and  attention,  anybody  of  common  under- 
standing may  learn  how  to  use  the  ordinary  figures  of  rhetoric, 
which  are  powerful  auxiliaries  in  rendering  speech  effective. 
There  is  nothing  that  impresses  like  figures.  They  are  edge-tools 
in  another  sense ;  for  they  cut  like  swords  and  wound  like  daggers. 
Daniel  O'Connell  once  silenced  a  troublesome  opponent  by  sud- 
denly turning  on  him  and  exclaiming :  "Sit  down,  you  pestiferous 
ramcat  I "  Lord  Chatham  finely  designates  the  corrupt  govern- 
ment contractor  and  jobber  as  ''that  blood-sucker,  that  muck- 
worm that  calls  itself  'the  friend  of  government.'"  "One 
should  never  take  a  vacation  till  the  sexton  gives  him  one,'' 
is  far  more  forcible  than  "One  should  never  cease  working  till 
death."  Instead  of  saying  that  one  must  not  express  high,  noble 
thoughts  before  low,  vulgar  people,  how  much  more  expressive  it 
is  to  say,  "Do  not  cast  pearls  before  swine."  When  Daniel  Webster 
said  of  Alexander  Hamilton,  "  lie  smote  the  rock  of  the  national 
resources,  and  abundant  streams  of  revenue  burst  forth;  he 
touched  the  dead  corpse  of  public  credit,  and  it  sprang  upon  its 
feet!"  he  uttered  something  far  more  impressive,  far  more  forcible 
and  beautiful,  than  if  he  had  merely  declared  that  Hamilton  had 
improved  the  finances  and  strengthened  the  public  credit  of  the 
country.  Everybody,  the  most  illiterate  as  well  as  the  most 
learned,  uses  figures.  The  illiterate  man  uses  them  unconsciously; 
and  so  does  the  learned  man  in  the  ardor  of  speech ;  in  fact,  most 
people  use  them,  and  ought  to  use  them,  unconsciously;  that  is, 
without  thinking  that  they  are  using  figures.  When  a  person 
exclaims,  on  seeing  a  large,  fat  man  coming  along,  "  Here  comes 
Jumbo!"  he  never  thinks  that  he  is  using  a  figure;  and  I  have  no 
doubt  that  even  Cobljett  himself,  when  he  said  that  figures  are 
edge-tools,  never  suspected  that  he  was  using  a  figure.  Our 
greatest  writers,  especially  the  poets,  are  full  of  figures.  Shakes- 
peare bristles  with  them ;  his  works  have  more  figures,  and  more 
happily-used  figures,  than  perhaps  those  of  any  other  author.  In 
Macbeth  alone  there  are  figures  of  almost  every  description.  Just 
count  the  fiarures  in  the  murder  scene  and  in  the  interview  between 


222  On  Putting  Sentences  Together, 

Macbeth  and  his  wife  after  the  murder,  and  you  will  be  amazed 
at  their  number  and  variety. 

Of  course,  I  do  not  pretend,  in  these  few  words  at  the  end  of  the 
book,  to  teach  you  all  about  figures  of  rhetoric;  but  I  wish  to  give 
you  an  idea  of  what  they  are,  that  you  may  not  be  entirely  ignorant 
of  the  matter. 

Though  rhetoricians  give  names  to  a  great  number  of  deviations 
from  the  ordinaiy  mode  of  expression,  there  are  just  about  a  dozen 
figures  of  rhetoric  whose  nature  and  use  are  worth  studying.  The 
others  are  common  turnings  and  v/indings  in  language,  in  which 
nobody  ever  makes  a  mistake ;  but  which,  closely  regarded,  are 
made  out  to  be  figures,  and  dubbed  with  hard  Greek  names,  the 
knowledge  of  which  is  of  no  possible  use.  Hence  Butler's  famous 
couplet . 

"  For  all  a  rhetorician's  rules 
Teach  nothing  but  to  name  his  tools." 

Of  these  dozen  figures,  the  most  common  are  the  metaphor  and 
the  SIMILE.  Definitions  are  hard,  and  sometimes  very  unsatisfac- 
tory, but  when  I  say  that  the  sentence  "  Doctor  Johnson  was  a 
gnarled  oak"  contains  a  metaphor,  and  that  the  sentence  "  Doctor 
Johnson  was  like  a  gnarled  oak  "  contains  a  simile,  you  will  see 
at  once  what  both  are.  "He  is  a  lion,"  contains  a  metaphor; 
"he  is  like  a  lion"  contains  a  simile.  The  metaphor  is  sometimes 
called  an  abridged  simile,  for  it  is  putting  one  thing  for  another 
which  it  resembles,  instead  of  saying  it  is  like  it.  The  simile  is 
always  introduced  by  the  words  like,  or  so,  or  words  of  similar 
import.  "Charity,  like  the  sun,  brightens  all  it  shines  upon.  A 
metaphor,  like  a  beam  of  light,  brightens  and  enlivens  its  object 
whenever  it  is  used."  When  somebody  cried  out  at  the  battle  of 
Quebec,  "They  fly!  they  fly!"  and  General  Wolff  asked,  "Who 
fly?"  both  used  a  figure;  for  men  can  only  flee,  not  flj'.  When  a 
little  boy  calls  out,  "  Look  at  that  frog!  I  will  let  this  stone  fly  at 
his  head!"  he  uses  a  figure;  so  that,  long  before  he  knows  what 
metaphors  are,  he  learns  to  use  them  rightly  enough.  Look  at 
Coleridge's  sentences  about  Cobbett,  on  page  210  of  the  Life,  and 
you  will  find  quite  a  number  of  metaphors. 

There  is  another  figure,  called  metonymy,  which  looks,  at  first 
sight,  like  the  metaphor;  but  which,  on  closer  inspection,  will  be 
found  to  be  essentially  different.  While  the  metaphor  is  really  a 
departure  from  the  ordinary  form  of  speech,  metonymy,  which  is 
termed  a  change  of  names,  is  one  of  the  most  ordinary  expressions. 
" The  kettle  boOs ;  the  lamp  burns;  he  smokes  his  pipe."    Now,  is 


and  on  Figurative  Langttage.  223 

it  the  kettle  that  boils,  or  the  ^r>ater  in  it?  the  lamp  that  burns,  or 
the  oil?  We  use  these  expressions  witlioul  ever  thinlcing  tliat  we 
are  using  figurative  language,  for  it  is  not  a  departure  from  the 
ordinary  form  of  speecli,  it  is  everyday  speech,  everyday  and 
common  language.  But,  when  we  say,  "Experience  Is  the  lamp 
by  which  my  feet  are  guided;"  or  "  We  shall  never  light  the  pipe 
of  peace  until  our  riglits  are  restored;"  or  "This  was  the  rock  on 
which  he  split;"  the  language  rises  at  once  in  force  and  impress- 
ivcness,  and  we  feel  that  there  is  a  deviation  from  the  common 
mode  of  expression.  The  former  is  metonymy,  and  the  latter 
metaphor.  "He  is  fond  of  his  bottle;  he  drank  three  glasses ;  he 
keeps  a  good  table ;"  these,  you  see,  are  merely  a  change  of  names. 
"The  gin-palace  is  the  recruiting-shop  for  the  penitentiary ;  Senator 
Conkling  sawed  off  the  limb  on  which  he  sat;  the  politicians  are 
hungry  for  office,  for  they  have  been  fasting  for  twenty  years;" 
these  are  metaphors,  and  you  see  they  convey  a  picture  to  the 
mind  which  no  other  words  can  convey  so  well. 

An  ALLEGORY  is  a  sort  of  continued  metaphor,  by  which  an 
imaginary''  history  with  a  veiled  meaning  maj'  be  told.  Macaulay 
says  Bunyan's  Pilgrim's  Progress  is  the  finest  allegory  which  has 
been  produced  in  two  thousand  years.  For  another  fine  example, 
see  80th  Psalm. 

Pebsonifioation  is  the  giving  of  L'fe  to  inanimate  things,  or  the 
giving  of  speech  and  reason  to  objects,  insects,  and  animals,  as  in 
fables.  Cobbett's  story  of  the  quarrel  in  the  pot-shop  has  good 
examples  of  this  figure.  To  personify  is  to  speak,  for  instance,  of 
winter  and  war  as  of  a  man ;  of  spring  and  peace  as  of  a  woman. 
"  Lol  steel-clad  War  his  gorgeous  standard  rears !" 

"  How  sleep  the  brave,  who  sink  to  rest 
By  all  their  country's  wishes  blest  I 
When  Spring,  with  dewy  fingers  cold, 
Returns  to  deck  their  hallowed  mould. 
She  there  shall  dress  a  sweeter  sod 
Than  Fancy's  feet  have  ever  trod." 

There  is  another  form  of  personification,  a  lower  form,  in  which 
we  give  the  qualities  of  beings  to  inanimate  objects :  we  sometimes 
speak  of  a  raging  storm,  a  cruel  disease,  a  remorseless  sword,  a 
scornful  lip,  a  dying  lamp,  the  smiling  harvest,  the  thirsty  ground, 
&  fearless  pen,  the  babbling  brook. 

Syitecdoche  is  taking  a  part  for  the  whole,  or  the  whole  for  a 
part;  as.  He  has  a  keen  eye;  he  has  seen  eighty  winters;  all  the 
world  runs  after  him. 

Intkrkogation  is  asking  a  question  which  does  not  need  an 


224  On    'Putting  Sentences  Together, 

answer;  as,  Can  any  man  count  the  stars?     Will  not  the  Judge  of 
all  the  earth  do  right?    This  is  a  favorite  figure  in  oratory. 

Exclamation  is  the  uttering  of  some  expression  of  surprise,  or  of 
some  emotion  of  the  mind ,  as.  What  a  piece  of  work  is  man !  how 
noble  in  reason !  how  infinite  in  faculties!  Would  that  some  good 
angel  had  put  Cobbett's  grammar  into  that  boy's  hands! 

Irony  is  saying  the  opposite  of  what  one  means;  as,  Cobbett 
was  remarkable  for  his  meekness  and  humility!  John  Bull's  Ad- 
dress to  Brother  Jonathan  (par.  214)  is  a  good  example.  See  also 
page  193  of  the  Life.     Here  is  another  example : 

"  So  goes  the  world  ;-if  wealthy,  you  may  call 

T7iis,  friend  ;  t/iat,  brother;— friends  and  brothers  all. 

Though  you  are  worthless,  witless  :  never  mind  it : 

You  may  have  been  a  stable-boy— what  then  i 

'Tis  wealth,  good  sir,  makes  honorable  men."'' 

Antithesis  is  the  comparing  or  placing  in  contrast  of  opposite 
qualities :  as.  Though  poor,  yet  proud ;  though  submissive,  gay. 
Tlie  prodigal  robs  his  heir,  the  miser  robs  himself.  Antithesis  is 
closely  allied  to  epigram,  which  is  a  short,  pithy  saying;  aa, 
When  you  liave  nothing  to  say,  say  it.  Wendell  Phillips  is  noted 
for  his  epigrammatic  style. 

Hyperbole  is  some  extravagant  expression,  employed  to  heighten 
the  impression  conveyed.  Macbeth  says  that  the  great  ocean  will 
not  wash  his  hand  clean  from  the  blood-stains  on  it,  but  that  his 
hand  will  rather  incarnadine  the  great  ocean ;  while  Lady  Macbeth 
says  that  "all  the  sweets  of  Arabia  will  not  sweeten  this  little 
hand."  Antony's  declaration  that  if  he  were  an  orator  like 
Brutus,  he  would  "make  the  stones  of  Rome  rise  in  mutiny,"  is 
another  good  example.  "  Rivers  of  waters  run  down  mine  eyes," 
13  the  Psalmist's  fine  figure. 

Apostrophe  is  a  sudden  turning  off  from  the  subject  of  dis- 
course to  address  some  absent  or  dead  person  or  thing  as  present. 
When  the  news  of  Lord  Byron's  death  came  to  England,  John  Jay, 
the  famous  preacher,  spoke  of  him  and  his  works  in  his  pulpit; 
then  he  suddenly  turned  and  addressed  him  as  if  he  were  present : 
*'0  Byron,  hadst  thou  listened  to  the  words  of  soberness  and 
truth;  hadst  thou  followed  the  counsels  of  the  wise  and  good; 
hadst  thou  repressed  thy  passions,  formed  nobler  aims  and  pursued 
a  nobler  ideal  of  life,  what  a  different  tale  we  would  have  had  to 
tell!  what  a  different  example,  for  all  generations,  thy  life  would 
have  afforded!"  His  apostrophe  was  something  like  this;  it  is 
twenty-five  years  since  I  read  it,   I  give  it  as  I  remember  it;  I 


and  on  Figurative  Language.  225 

only  know  it  made  a  deep  impression  on  me  at  the  time.  And 
Byron  himself,  ni  his  wonderful  Childe  Harold,  gives  us  perhaps 
the  finest  apostrophe  in  our  language.  He  is  speaking  of  the 
ocean,  when  he  suddenly  turns  and  addresses  it  in  those  noble 
lines  beginning : 

.    '  Roll  on,  thou  deep  and  dark  blue  Ocean— roll  I 
Ten  thousand  fleets  sweep  over  thee  in  vain. 
Man  marks  the  earth  with  ruin— his  control 
Stops  with  the  shore." 

Climax  is  rising  from  one  point  to  another  till  the  highest 
is  reached,  or  descending  from  one  point  to  another  till  the 
lowest  is  reached.  I  have  read  somewhere  this  capital  example, 
which  is  said  to  be  from  a  sermon  on  Christian  progress  by  a 
negro  preacher :  "If  you  cannot  fly,  run ;  if  you  cannot  run,  walk; 
if  you  cannot  walk,  crawl;  if  you  cannot  crawl,  loorm  it  along!" 

Alliteeation  is  the  repeating  of  the  same  letter  at  the  beginning 
of  each  of  two  or  more  words  in  the  same  line  or  sentence. 

"  Begot  hy  butchers  and  by  bishops  bred, 
How  high  his  highness  holds  his  haughty  head." 

"An  Austrian  army,  awfully  arrayed. 
Boldly  by  battery  besiege  Belgrade." 

Besides  these,  there  are  figures  of  etymology  and  figures  of 
SYNTAX.  The  former  are  hardly  worth  mentioning,  being  simply 
such  changes  in  words  as  o'er  for  oner,  tho'  for  thmigh,  'gainst  for 
against,  His  for  it  is,  withouten  for  without,  enchain  for  cliain,  and  a 
few  similar  ones,  all  of  which  are  called  by  the  hardest  of  Greek 
names.  These  figures  are  simply  deviations  from  the  usual  orthog- 
raphy of  words,  and  are  sometimes  called  figures  of  orthography. 
The  figures  of  syntax  are  four  in  number:  ellipsis,  pleonasm, 
ENALLAGE,  and  HYPERBATON.  The  first,  which  has  already  been 
explained,  consists,  you  will  remember,  in  leaving  understood 
some  word  or  words;  as,  "This  is  the  man  I  mean,"  instead  of 
"whom  I  mean."  Pleonasm  is  the  opposite  of  this;  that  is,  the 
using  of  superfluous  words ;  and  the  most  common  example  of  it 
is  in  the  use  of  the  word  got.  ' '  What  have  you  got  ?  I  have  got 
a  book;  you  have  got  a  horse."  These  ^'f^  may  all  be  left  out. 
The  Bible  is  full  of  this  figure,  as  indeed  of  all  figures;  as,  "  There 
shall  not  be  left  one  stone  upon  another  that  shall  not  be  thrown 
down.  Oh  ye  inhabitants  of  the  world,  and  dwellers  on  the  earth !" 
Enallage  may  be  said  to  be  the  name  given  to  the  grammatical 
mistakes  which  the  poets  are  allowed  to  make,  on  account  of  the 
shackles  in  which  they  are  obliged  to  walk.  In  Leigh  Hunt's 
poem,  "  The  Glove  and  the  Lions,"  occur  these  lines: 
10* 


226  On  Putting  Sentences  Together, 

"  De  Lorge's  love  o'erheard  the  king,  a  beauteous,  lively  dame. 
With  dark  bright  eyes,  which  always  seemed  the  same" 

Now,  according  to  the  rules  of  grammar,  these  lines  declare  that 
the  king  was  a  beauteous,  lively  dame ;  but  the  poet  was  obliged 
to  write  thus  for  the  sake  of  the  rhyme.  This  is  called  enallage. 
Milton's  ' '  Beelzebub  than  whom "  may  also  be  called  enallage. 
HjTjerbaton  is  somewhat  similar  to  inversion,  which  latter  con- 
sists in  placing  the  predicate  or  the  object  before  the  subject ;  as, 
In  came  the  king ;  down  fell  the  supplicant ;  him  I  adore.  Inver- 
sion is  used  to  give  force  and  emphasis  to  an  expression;  but 
hyperbaton  is  simply  the  transposition  of  a  word  or  words  for  the 
sake  of  the  measure;  as,  "While  its  song  rolls  the  woods  along," 
instead  of  "While  its  song  rolls  along  the  woods." 

There  is  no  better  example  of  an  awkward  blunder  in  the  use  of 
figures  than  that  of  the  man  who  prayed  that  ' '  the  word  which  had 
been  preached  might  be  like  a  nail  driven  in  a  sure  place,  sending 
its  roots  downward  and  its  branches  upward,  spreading  itself  like  a 
green  bay-tree,  fair  as  the  moon,  clear  as  the  sun,  and  terrible  as  an 
army  with  banners  1 "  A  wonderful  nail,  indeed,  this  would  be. 
Lord  Cockburn,  in  his  Memoirs,  tells  of  a  man  who,  on  being  asked 
at  a  public  dinner  to  give  a  toast,  exclaimed:  "  Here's  to  the  moon, 
shining  on  the  calm  bosom  of  a  lake ! "  The  man  thought,  no 
doubt,  that  he  was  saving  something  figurative  and  fine.  Franklin, 
in  a  toast  he  gave  at  a  diplomatic  dinner  at  Versailles,  made  use  of 
the  sun  and  moon  in  a  very  different  manner.  The  British  minister 
began  witli :  "  George  III,  who,  like  the  sun  in  his  meridian,  spreads 
a  luster  throughout  and  enlightens  the  world."  The  French  minister 
followed  with :  "Louis  XVI,  wlio,  like  the  moon,  sheds  his  mild  and 
benignant  rays  on  and  influences  the  globe."  Then  our  American 
Franklin  gave :  "  George  Washington,  commander  of  the  American 
army,  who,  like  Joshua  of  old,  commanded  the  sun  and  the  moon 
to  stand  still,  and  they  obeyed  him  I "  Never  were  simile  and  meta- 
phor more  happily  combined. 

I  cannot  help  thinking  that,  when  Cobbett  called  figm-es  double- 
edged  tools,  he  had  in  mind  the  mischief  which  some  of  his  own 
figures  had  played  with  himself  on  certain  occasions.  His  likening 
of  Doctor  Rush  to  Doctor  Sangrado  cost  him  $5,000 ;  his  declara- 
tion that  the  appointment  of  Lord  Hardwicke  to  the  vice-royalty  of 
Ireland  was  "putting  the  surgeon's  apprentice  to  bleeding  the  hos- 
pital patients,"  cost  him  £500;  and  his  comparison  of  Castlereagh's 
discipline  of  British  troops  to  Napoleon's  discipline  of  his  con- 
scripts, cost  him  £1,000  and  an  imprisonment  of  two  years.     Dog- 


and  on  Figurative  Language.  227 

berry  found  comparisons  "odorous;"  Cobbett  found  them  very 
expensive  and  very  injurious.  Defoe's  figures  served  him  even  still 
worse ;  for  his  sarcastic  irony  in  "The  Shortest  Way  w^ith  the  Dis- 
senters" cost  him  his  ears,  exposure  in  the  pillory,  and  the  loss 
of  his  liberty  for  two  years.  The  remorseless  metaphor  which 
Brougham  applied  to  Canning,  that  he  was  guilty  of  the  "most 
monstrous  tergiversation  [shuffling,  shifting,  twisting,  turning]  for 
office,"  caused  that  statesman,  it  is  said,  to  take  to  his  bed,  and 
never  to  rise  from  it. 

VERSIFICATION. 

Now  comes  that  mysterious  matter,  which  I  promised,  at  the 
beginning  of  the  book,  to  give  you  an  account  of,  versification. 
I  said  it  is  a  simple  matter;  so  it  is;  and  yet  many  persons  look 
upon  it  as  something  very  complicated,  far  too  difficult  for  com- 
mon people  to  learn,  and  never  studied  by  anybody  but  poets. 

Verse  is  of  two  kinds,  rhyme  and  blank  verse.  Rhyme  con- 
sists of  measured  lines,  every  two  of  which  ending  with  words  or 
syllables  of  a  similar  sound;  blank  verse  consists  of  lines  with 
measure  but  no  rhyme.  Shakespeare's  tragedies  and  Milton's 
Paradise  Lost  are  in  blank  verse ;  Butler's  Hudibras  and  Pope's 
translation  of  the  Iliad— indeed  almost  all  Pope's  poems — are  in 
rhyme.  Blank  verse  gives  the  poet  much  more  freedom  and  ease 
in  the  expression  of  his  thoughts  tlian  rhjine ;  consequently  our 
noblest  poetry  is  in  this  form. 

Although  there  are  many  kinds  of  measure  or  meter,  there  are 
rarely  to  be  found  in  English  poetry  more  than  four  kinds.  These 
four  are:  the  iambic,  trochaic,  anapestic,  and  dactylic  measures; 
all  hard  names,  but  meaning  easy  things.  Now,  what  makes  these 
measures  easy  to  learn  is,  that  they  go  in  pairs,  and  each  one  in 
each  pair  is  the  contrary  or  the  opposite  of  the  otlier. 

Each  line  of  poetry  consists  of  a  certain  number  of  feet — and 
you  may  have  them  from  one  foot  up  to  ten  feet — and  each  foot 
consists  of  either  two  or  three  syllables.  A  foot  in  iambic  measure 
is  called  an  iambus ;  in  trochaic  measure,  a  trocliee ;  in  anapestic 
measure,  an  anapest;  in  dactylic  measure,  a  dactyl.  Now  the 
iambus  and  the  trochee  are  feet  of  two  syllables,  and  the  anapest 
and  the  dactyl  are  feet  of  three  syllables.  The  two  syllables  of  the 
iambus  are  short-long;  as,  re-call',  at-tend'.  The  two  syllables  of 
the  trochee  are  long-short;  as,  ho'-ly,  cy'-press.  Therefore  you 
see  that  the  one  is  the  opposite  of  the  other.  Counting  the  feet  in 
a  line  of  poetry,  or  pausing  after  eacli  foot  as  you  go  along,  is 


228  On  Putting  Sentences   Together, 

called  scanning.     Now  scan  me  the  following  verse,  and  tell  me 
whether  it  is  in  iambic  or  trochaic  measure : 

The  cur  |  few  tolls  |  the  knell  |  of  part  |  ing  day ; 

The  low  I  ing  h«rd  !  winds  slow  |  ly  o'er  |  the  lea ; 
The  plough  1  man  home  |  ward  plods  |  his  wea  |  ry  way, 

And  leaves  |  the  world  |  to  dark  |  ness  and  |  to  me. 

Gray^s  Elegy  in  a  Country  Churchyard. 

And  tell  me  if  the  following  stanza  is  in  the  same  measure  • 

Once  up  I  on  a  I  mid-night  |  drea-ry, 

While  1 1  pon-der'd  |  weak  and  |  wea-ry 

O-ver  I  many  a  |  quaint  and  |  cu-rious  |  vol-ume 

Of  for  I  got-ten  |  lore. 

While  1 1  nod-ded  |  near-ly  1  nap-ping, 

Sud-den  |  ly  there  I  came  a  I  tap-ping. 

As  of  I  some  one  |  gent-ly  |  rap-ping. 

Rap-ping  |  at  my  I  cham-ber  1  door.— Po«'s  Baven. 

You  see  that  in  the  first  stanza  the  tone  falls  always  on  the  second 
syllable,  while  in  the  second  the  tone  falls  always  on  the  fiist. 
The  first  stanza,  therefore,  is  in  the  iambic  measure,  and  the  second 
in  the  trochaic. 

Now  the  other  two  measures  are  also  opposites.  Mark  the  fol- 
lowing verse,  and  tell  me  whether  it  is  made  up  of  short-short-long 
feet  (anapestic),  or  long-short-short  feet  (dactylic) : 

The  As-syr  |  ian  came  down  |  like  the  wolf  I  on  the  fold, 
And  his  co  |  horts  were  gleam  |  ing  in  pur  |  pie  and  gold  ; 
And  the  sheen  |  of  their  spears  |  was  like  stars  |  on  the  sea 
When  the  blue  |  wave  rolls  night  |  ly  on  deep  |  Ga-li-lee. 

Byron''8  Destruction  of  Sennacherib, 

Now  observe  that  the  feet  in  the  foUovdng  verse  are  the  opposite 
or  the  reverse  of  the  preceding : 

Bird  of  the  |  wil-der-ness. 

Blithe-some  and  |  cum-ber-less. 
Sweet  be  thy  |  ma-tln  o'er  |  moor-land  and  |  lea  1 

Em-blem  of  |  hap-pi-ness. 

Blest  is  thy  I  dwell-ing  place — 
Oh  to  a  I  bide  in  the  |  des-ert  with  I  thee  ! 

The  Lark,  by  James  Hogg. 

The  first  of  these  last  two  stanzas  is,  therefore,  in  anapestic 
measure,  and  the  second  in  dactylic.  So  that  the  four  verses 
represent  the  iambic,  the  trochaic,  the  anapestic,  and  the  dactylic 
measure;  and  you  should  learn  all  four  by  heart,  as  a  guide  in 
enabling  you  to  determine  the  measure  of  other  poems.  Some- 
thing that  will  help  you  to  remember  the  dactylic  measure  is  the 
derivation  of  the  word  dactyl,  which  is  a  Greek  word  signifying- 


and  on  Figurative  Language.  229 

finger.  Now  look  at  your  forefinger,  and  see  if  it  does  not  con- 
sist of  one  long  joint  and  two  short  ones  (curnHber-less).  So  that  I 
may  say — although  it  sounds  like  an  Irish  bull — that  this  foot  is  so 
called  because  it  is  like  a.  finger. 

Of  all  the  poems  in  the  English  language,  nine  out  of  ten  are  in 
the  iambic  measure,  which  is  no  doubt  because  that  measure  is 
most  suited  to  the  nature  of  our  language.  Poor  Lord  Surrey — 
who  seems  to  have  been  a  noble,  chivalric  character,  something 
like  Sidney;  beheaded  in  the  flower  of  his  age  by  the  brutal 
Henry  VIII. — was  the  first  to  write  in  this  measure.  Nearly  aU 
our  dramatic  and  epic  poetry,  in  fact  nearly  all  our  great  poems, 
are  in  this  measure.  All  Shakespeare's  blank-verse  plays,  Milton's 
Paradise  Lost,  Pope's  Homer,  Spenser's  Faery  Queene,  Butler's 
Hudibras,  and  Bryant's  Thanatopsis  are  in  iambic  measure.  There 
is  only  one  thing  more  to  be  said,  and  that  is,  that  you  will  some- 
times find  a  mixture  of  these  various  measures  in  one  and  the  same 
poem ;  but  some  one  measure  is,  however,  usually  so  predominant 
as  to  give  a  character  to  the  verse.  Verse  means  poetry  in  gen- 
eral, but  one  single  line  of  poetry  is  also  called  a  verse. 


230  iSix  Lessons 


THE   SIX   LESSONS. 


LETTER    XXIV. 

SIX    LESSONS,    INTENDED    TO    PREVENT    STATESMEN    FROM     USING 
FALSE  GRAMMAR,  AND  FROM  WRITING  IN  AN  AWKWARD  MANNER. 

Harpenden,  Hertfordshire,  June  23,  1822. 
My  DEAR  James: 

In  my  first  Letter,  I  observed  that  it  was  of  the  great- 
est importance  that  statesmen,  above  all  others,  should 
be  able  to  ^crite  veil.  It  happens,  however,  but  too  fre- 
quently, that  that  which  should  be,  in  this  case  as  well  as 
in  others,  is  not ;  sufficient  proof  of  which  you  will  find 
in  the  remarks  which  I  am  now  about  to  make.  The 
Letter  to  Tierney — a  thing  which  I  foresaw  would  become 
of  gi'eat  and  lasting  importance ;  a  thing  to  which  I  knew 
I  should  frequently  have  to  recur  with  satisfaction — I 
wTote  on  the  anniversary  of  the  day  on  which,  in  the  year 
1810,  I  was  sentenced  to  be  imprisoned  for  two  yeai's,  to 
jDay  a  fine  of  a  thousand  pounds,  and  to  be  held  in  bonds 
of  five  thousand  pounds  for  seven  years,  for  having  pub- 
licly, and  in  print,  expressed  my  indignation  at  the  flog- 
ging of  English  local-militia  men  in  the  town  of  Ely, 
under  a  guai'd  of  German  soldiers.  I  thought  of  this  at 
a  time  when  I  saw  those  events  approaching  which  I  was 
certain  would,  by  fulfilling  my  predictions,  bring  me  a 
compensation  for  the  unmerited  sufferings  and  insults 
heaped  upon  me  w4th  so  unsparing  a  hand.  For  writiag 
the  present  little  work,  I  select  the  anniversary  of  a  day 
which  your  excellent  conduct  makes  me  regard  as  amongst 
the  most  blessed  in  the  calendar.  Who,  but  myself,  can 
imagine  what  I  felt  when  I  left  you  behind  me  at  New 


Introduction.  231 

York!  Let  this  teJl  my  persecutors  that  you  have  made 
me  more  than  amends  for  all  the  losses,  all  the  fatigue, 
all  the  dangers,  and  all  the  anxieties  attendmg  that  exile 
of  which  their  baseness  and  injustice  were  the  cause. 

The  bad  wi'iting,  on  which  I  am  about  to  remai'k,  I  do 
not  pretend  to  look  on  as  the  cause  of  the  present  pubhc 
calamities,  or  of  any  part  of  them ;  but  it  is  a  proof  of  a 
deficiency  in  that  sort  of  talent  which  appeal's  to  me  to 
be  necessary  in  men  intnisted  with  great  affahs.  He  who 
writes  badly  thinks  badly.  Confusedness  in  words  can 
proceed  fi'om  nothing  but  confusedness  in  the  thoughts 
which  give  rise  to  them.  These  things  may  be  of  trifling 
importance  when  the  actors  move  in  private  life;  but 
when  the  happiness  of  millions  of  men  is  at  stake,  they 
are  of  an  importance  not  easily  to  be  described. 

The  pieces  of  writing  that  I  am  about  to  comment  on  I 
deem  had  xoriting;  and,  as  you  will  see,  the  writing  may 
be  bad,  though  there  may  be  no  grammatical  en'or  in  it. 
The  best  writing  is  that  which  is  best  calculated  to  secui'e 
the  object  of  the  wiiter;  and  the  worst,  that  which  is  the 
least  likely  to  effect  that  purpose.  But  it  is  not  in  this 
extended  sense  of  the  words  that  I  am  now  going  to  con- 
sider any  wi'iting.  I  am  merely  about  to  give  specimens 
of  badly- written  papers,  as  a  warning  to  the  statesmen  of 
the  present  day ;  and  as  proofs,  in  addition  to  those  which 
you  have  already  seen,  that  we  ought  not  to  conclude  that 
a  man  has  gieat  abilities  merely  because  he  receives  great 
sums  of  the  pubHc  money. 

The  specimens,  that  I  shall  give,  consist  of  papers  that 
relate  to  measm-es  and  events  of  the  very  first  importance. 
The  fii'st  is  the  speech  of  the  Speaker  of  the  House  of 
Commons  to  the  regent,  at  the  close  of  the  fii'st  session 
of  1819,  dxu-ing  which  IVIr.  Peel's,  or  the  Cash-Payment, 
Bill  had  been  passed;  the  second  is  the  answer  of  the 
regent  to  that  speech ;  the  first  is  the  work  of  the  House ; 
the  second  that  of  the  ministry. 


232  Six  Lessons 

In  Letter  XXII,  I  gave  the  reasons  why  we  had  a  right  to 
expect  perfection  in  writings  of  this  description.  I  there 
described  the  persons  to  whom  the  business  of  writing 
king's  speeches  belongs.  The  Speaker  of  the  House  of 
Commons  is  to  be  taken  as  the  man  of  the  greatest  talent 
in  that  House.  He  is  called  the  "First  Commoner  of 
England."  Figure  to  yourself,  then,  the  king  on  his 
throne,  in  the  House  of  Lords;  the  lords  standing  in 
their  robes;  the  Commons  coming  to  the  bar,  with  the 
f^peaker  at  their  head,  gorgeously  attked,  with  the  mace 
held  beside  him;  figiu'e  this  scene  to  youi'self,  and  you 
will  almost  think  it  sedition  and  blasphemy  to  suppose 
it  possible  that  the  speech  made  to  the  king,  or  that  his 
majesty's  answer,  both  prepared  and  written  down  long 
beforehand,  should  be  anything  short  of  perfection. 
Follow  me,  then,  my  deai*  son,  thi'ough  this  Letter ;  and 
you  will  see  that  we  are  not  to  judge  of  men's  talents  by 
the  di'esses  they  weai',  by  the  offices  they  fill,  or  by  the 
power  they  possess. 

After  these  two  papers,  I  shall  take  some  papers  wiitten 
by  Lord  Castlereagh,  by  the  Duke  of  Wellington,  and  by 
the  Marquis  Wellesley.  These  are  three  of  those  persons 
who  have,  of  late  years,  made  the  greatest  figure  in  our 
affairs  with  foreign  nations.  The  transactions  which  have 
been  committed  to  their  management  have  been  such  as 
were  hardly  ever  exceeded  in  point  of  magnitude,  whether 
we  look  at  the  transactions  themselves  or  at  their  natiu'al 
consequences.  How  much  more  fit  than  other  men  they 
were  to  be  thus  confided  in ;  how  much  more  fit  to  have 
the  interest  and  honor  of  a  great  nation  committed  to 
their  hands,  you  will  be  able  to  judge  when  you  shall 
have  read  my  remarks  on  those  of  their  papers  to  which 
I  have  here  alluded. 

In  the  making  of  my  comments,  I  shall  insert  the  several 
papers,  a  paragraph  or  two,  or  more,  at  a  time;  and  I 
shall  number  the  paragraphs  for  the  pm-pose  of  more 
easy  reference. 


Speaker  s  Speech.  233 


LESSON    I. 

Remarks  on  the  Speech  oj  the  Speaker  of  the  House  of 
Commons  to  the  Prince  Regent.,  which  Speech  was 
made  at  the  close  of  the  first  Session  of  1819,  during 
which  Session  PeeVs  Rill  \oas  passed. 

^'  May  it  please  your  Royal  Highness, 

1.  "  We,  his  Majesty's  faithful  Commons  of  the  United  Kingdom 
of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland  in  Parliament  assembled,  attend  your 
Royal  Highness  with  our  concluding  Bill  of  Supply. 

2.  "The  subjects  which  have  occupied  our  attention  have  been 
more  numerous,  more  various  and  more  important,  than  are  usually 
submitted  to  the  consideration  of  Parliament  in  the  same  Session." 

It  is  difficult  to  say  what  is  meant,  in  Paragraph  No.  2, 
by  the  word  various.  The  Speaker  had  ah-eady  said  that 
the  subjects  were  more  numerous.,  which  was  quite  enough ; 
for  they  necessarily  differed  from  each  other,  or  they  were 
one  and  the  same ;  and,  therefore,  the  word  various  can 
in  this  place  have  no  meaning  at  all,  unless  it  mean  that 
the  subjects  were  variegated  in  themselves,  which  would 
be  only  one  degree  above  sheer  nonsense. 

Next  comes  the  '^tha)i  are,'''  without  a  nominative  case. 
Chambermaids,  indeed,  write  in  this  way,  and,  in  such  a 
case,  "  the  dear  unintelligible  scrawl "  is,  as  the  young  rake 
says  in  the  play,  "ten  thousands  times  more  charming" 
than  correct  wiitmg ;  but  from  a  Speaker  in  his  robes  we 
might  have  expected  "than  those  lohich  are  usually  sub- 
mitted." 

And  what  does  the  Speaker  mean  by  "in  the  sam,e 
Session  ? "  He  may  mean  " in  one  and  the  same  Session ; " 
but  what  business  had  the  word  same  there  at  all?  Could 
he  not  have  said,  "during  one  Session,"  or  "during  a 
single  Session?" 

3.  "  Upon  many  of  these  subjects  we  have  been  engaged  in  long 
and  unwearied  examinations;  but  such  has  been  the  pressure  of 


234  '^ix  Lessons. 

other  business,  and  particularly  of  that  which  ordinarily  belongs 
to  a  first  Session  of  Parliament— and  such  the  magnittuie  and 
intricacy  of  many  of  those  inquiries,  that  the  limits  of  the  present 
Session  have  not  allowed  of  bringing  them  to  a  close." 

There  is  bad  taste,  at  least,  in  using  the  word  examin- 
ations in  one  pait  of  the  sentence,  and  the  word  inquiries 
in  the  other  pai't,  especially  as  the  pronoun  those  was 
used  in  the  latter  case.  The  verb  "has''  agrees  in  num- 
ber with  the  noun  ^'pressure;'"  but  the  Speaker,  notwith- 
standing the  aid  of  his  wig,  was  not  able  to  perceive  that 
the  same  verb  did  not  agree  in  number  with  the  nouna 
"magnitude  and  intricacy."  "  Such  has  been  the  pressure, 
and  such  have  been  the  magnitude  atid  intricacy. " 

4.  "But,  Sir,  of  those  measures  which  we  have  completed,  the 
most  jyrominent,  the  most  important,  and,  as  we  trust,  in  their 
consequences,  the  most  beneficial  to  the  public,  are  the  measures 
which  have  grown  out  of  the  consideration  of  the  present  state  of 
Vie  country — both  in  its  currency  and  its  finances." 

There  is  not  here  any  positive  error  in  grammai*;  but 
there  is  something  a  great  deal  worse ;  namely,  unintelli- 
gible words.  The  epithet  '•'•  prominent  was  wholly  unnec- 
essary, and  only  served  to  inflate  the  sentence.  It  would 
have  been  prudent  not  to  anticipate,  in  so  marked  a 
manner,  beneficial  consequences  from  Peel's  Bill;  but 
what  are  we  to  understand  from  the  latter  pait  of  the 
sentence?  Here  are  measures  growing  out  of  the  con- 
sideration of  the  state  of  the  country  i7i  its  currency  and 
finances.  What !  The  state  of  the  country  171  its  currency '? 
Or  is  it  the  consideration  in  its  currency  ?  And  what  had 
the  word  both  to  do  there  at  all?  The  Speaker  meant 
that  the  measures  had  grown  out  of,  or,  which  would  have 
been  much  more  dignified,  had  been  the  result  of  a  con- 
sideration of  the  present  state  of  the  country,  with  regai'd 
to  its  currency  as  well  as  with  regai'd  to  its  finances. 

5.  "Early,  Sir,  in  the  present  Session,  we  instituted  an  inquiry 
into  the  effects  produced  on  the  exchanges  with  foreign  countries, 


Speaker's  Speech.  235 

and  the  state  of  the  circulating  medium,  by  the  restriction  on 
payments  in  cash  by  the  Bank.  This  inquiry  was  inost  anxioudi/ 
and  niost  deliberately  conducted,  and  in  its  result  led  to  the  conclusion 
that  it  was  most  desirable,  quickly,  but  with  due  precautions,  to 
return  to  our  ancient  and  healthful  state  of  currency : — Tliat  what- 
ever might  have  been  the  expediency  of  the  Acts  for  the  suspension 
of  payments  of  cash  at  the  different  periods  at  which  they  were 
enacted  (and  doubtless  they  were  expedient),  whilst  the  country  was 
involved  in  the  most  expensive  contest  that  ever  weighed  down 
the  finances  of  any  country — still  that,  the  necessity  for  the  con- 
tinuance of  these  Acts  having  ceased,  it  became  us  with  as  little 
delay  as  possible  (avoiding  carefully  the  convuldon  of  too  rapid  a 
transition)  to  return  to  our  ancient  system;  and  that,  if  at  any 
period,  and  under  any  circumstances,  this  return  could  be  effected 
without  national  inconvenience,  it  was  at  the  p?'esent,  when  this 
mighty  nation,  with  a  proud  retrospect  of  the  past,  after  having 
made  the  greatest  efforts,  and  achieved  the  noblest  objects,  was 
now  repomig  in  a  confident,  and,  as  wefo/idly  hope,  a  well-founded 
expectation  of  a  sound  and  lastitig  peace." 

Here,  at  the  beginning  of  this  long  and  most  confused 
paragraph,  are  two  sentences,  perfect  rivals  in  all  respects ; 
each  has  37  words  in  it;  each  has  thi-ee  blunders;  and 
the  one  is  just  as  obscure  as  the  other.  To  ^^ institute'"  is 
to  settle,  to  Jix,  to  erect,  to  establish;  and  not  to  set  about 
or  undertake,  which  was  what  was  done  here.  If  I  were 
to  tell  you  that  I  have  instituted  an  inquiiy  into  the  quali- 
ties of  the  Speaker's  speech,  you  would,  though  I  am  your 
father,  be  almost  warranted  in  calling  me  an  egregious 
coxcomb.  But  what  are  we  to  make  of  the  '■'and  the" 
further  on  ?  Does  the  Speaker  mean  that  they  instituted 
(since  he  will  have  it  so)  an  inquiry  hito  the  state  of  the 
circulating  medium,  or  into  the  effects  produced  on  the 
circulating  medium  by  the  cash  suspension  ?  I  defy  any 
man  living  to  say  which  of  the  two  is  meant  by  his  words. 
And  then  we  come  to  "  by  the  Bank ; "  and  here  the  only 
possible  meaning  of  the  words  is,  that  the  restriction  was 
imposed  by  the  Bank;  whereas  the  Speaker  means  the 
restriction  on  payments  made  at  the  Bank.     If  ai,  instead 


236  Six  Lessons. 

of  by,  had  happened  to  drop  out  of  the  wig,  this  part  of 
the  sentence  would  have  been  free  from  enor. 

As  to  the  second  sentence  in  this  Paragraph  No.  5,  I 
may  first  observe  on  the  incongruity  of  the  Speaker's  two 
superlative  adverbs.  Anxiously  means  loith  inquietude; 
and  deliberately  means  coolly,  slowly,  warily,  and  the  like. 
The  first  implies  a  disturbed,  the  latter  a  tranquil,  state 
of  the  mind ;  and  a  mixtui'e  of  these  it  was,  it  appears, 
that  produced  Peel's  Bill;  this  mixtui'e  it  was  which  "2/1 
its  residts,  LED  to  the  conclusion;'''  that  is  to  say,  the 
result  led  to  the  result;  result  being  conclusion,  and  con- 
clusion being  result.  But  tautology  is,  you  see,  a  favorite 
with  this  son  of  the  Aichbishop  of  Canterbm-y,  more 
proofs  of  which  you  have  yet  to  witness.  And  why  must 
the  king  be  compelled  to  hear  the  pkrase  "  healthful  state 
of  the  currency,"  threadbare  as  it  had  long  before  been 
wtirn  by  Hokner  and  all  his  tribe  of  coxcombs  of  the  Edin- 
biu-gh  Review?  Would  not  '■'■our  ancient  currency '^  have 
answered  every  purpose?  And  would  it  not  have  better 
become  the  lips  of  a  person  in  the  high  station  of  Speaker 
of  the  House  of  Commons? 

The  remaining  part  of  this  paragraph  is  such  a  mass  of 
confusion  that  one  hardly  knows  where  or  how  to  begin 
upon  it.  The  "  that "  after  the  colon  and  the  dash  seems 
to  connect  it  with  what  has  gone  before ;  and  yet  what 
connection  is  there?  Immediately  after  this  '■'■that'" 
begins  a  parenthetical  phrase,  which  is  interrupted  by  a 
jKtrenthesis,  and  then  the  parenthetical  phi'ase  goes  on 
again  till  it  comes  to  a  dash,  after  which  you  come  to  the 
words  that  join  themselves  to  the  first  '■'■  that.""  These 
words  are  "  still  thaty  Then,  on  goes  the  pai'enthetical 
phrase  again  till  you  come  to  '■'■it  became  us.''''  Then 
comes  more  parenthetical  matter  and  another  parenthesis; 
and  then  comes  "  to  return  to  our  ancient  systemy  Take 
out  all  the  parenthetical  matter,  and  the  paragraph  will 
stand   thus:    "That   it  was   desirable   to   return  to  our 


Speaker's  Speech.  237 

ancient  and  healthful  state  of  currency : — that — still  thaty 
it  became  us  to  retui'n  to  our  ancient  system." 

But  only  thmk  of  saying  "whatever  might  have  been 
the  expediency  of  the  acts ; "  and  then  to  make  a  paren- 
thesis directly  afterwards  for  the  express  pui-pose  of  posi- 
tively asserting  that  they  '•'•xoere  expedient!  Only  tlmik 
of  the  necessity  for  the  continuance  of  the  acts  having 
ceased,  and  of  its  being  becoming  in  the  Parliament  to 
return  to  cash  payments  as  soon  as  ])ossible,  and  yet  that 
a  convulsion  teas  to  be  apprehended  from  a  too  rapid 
transition ;  that  is  to  say,  from  retm-ning  to  cash  payments 
sooner  than  possible  ! 

After  this  comes  a  doubt  whether  the  thing  can  be  done 
at  all ;  for  we  are  told  that  the  Parliament,  in  its  wisdom, 
concluded  that,  if  "  at  any  period  this  return  could  be 
effected  without  national  inconvenience,  it  loas  at  the 
present.'''  And  then  follows  that  piece  of  sublime  non- 
sense about  the  nation's  reposing  in  the  fond  (that  is, 
foolish)  hope  of,  not  only  a  lasting,  but  also  a  sound, 
peace.  A  lasting  peace  would  have  been  enough  for  a 
common  man ;  but  the  son  of  an  Archbishop  must  have  it 
sound  as  well  as  lasting,  or  else  he  would  not  give  a  far- 
thing for  it. 

C.  "In  considering,  Sir,  the  state  of  our  finances,  and  in  minutely 
comparnig  our  income  witli  our  expenditure,  it  appeared  to  us  that 
tlie  e.\cess  of  our  mcorae  was  wot  fairly  adequate  for  the  purposes  to 
which  It  was  applicable — the  gradual  reduction  of  the  national  debt. 

7.  '  It  appeared  to  us  that  a  clear  available  surplus  of  at  least  five 
millions  ought  to  be  set  apart  for  that  object. 

8.  "This,  Sir,  has  been  effected  by  the  additional  imjMsition  of 
three  millions  of  taxes." 

The  word  '■'•fairly,'"  in  Paragraph  No.  6,  is  a  redun- 
dancy; it  is  mere  slang.  "■  Adequate /br "  ought  to  be 
"adequate  tof  and  ^'- applicahW"  is  inappUcahle  to  the 
case;  for  the  money  was  applicable  to  any  jyurjwse.  It 
should  have  been,  "the  pui'pose  (and  not  the  jnirjxjses) 


238  Six  Lessons. 

for  which  it  was  intended;''  or,  "the  puipose  to  which 
it  was  intended  to  be  applied." 

The  7th  Paiagraph  is  a  heap  of  redundant  Treasui-y- 
slang.  Here  we  have  sur2)lus;  that  is  to  say,  an  over- 
quantity;  but  this  is  not  enough  for  the  Speaker,  who 
must  have  it  cleai'  also ;  and  not  only  clear,  but  available; 
and  then  he  must  have  it  set  apart  into  the  bargain! 
Leave  out  all  the  words  in  italics,  and  put  purpose  instead 
of  object  at  the  end;  and  then  you  have  something  like 
common  sense  as  to  the  words,  but  still  foolish  enough  as 
to  the  political  view  of  the  matter. 

Even  the  8th  Paragi'aph,  a  simple  sentence  of  fourteen 
words,  could  not  be  free  from  fault.  What  does  the 
Speaker  mean  by  an  ^'■additional  imposition"?  Did  he 
imagine  that  the  king  would  be  fool  enough  to  believe 
that  the  Pai'liament  had  imposed  three  millions  of  taxes 
without  making  an  addition  to  former  impositions'?  How 
was  the  imposition  to  be  other  than  "  additional  ?  "  ^Vhy, 
therefore,  cram  in  this  word? 

9.  "Sir,  in  adopting  this  course,  his  Majesty's  faithful  Commons 
did  not  conceal  frcmi  themselves  that  they  were  calling  upon  the 
nation  for  a  great  exertion :  but  well  knowing  that  honor,  and  ctMr- 
acter,  and  independence  have  at  all  times  been  the  first  and  dearest 
objects  of  the  hearts  of  Englishmen,  we  felt  assured  that  there  was 
no  difficulty  that  the  country  could  not  encounter,  and  no  pressure 
to  which  she  would  not  willingly  and  cheerfully  submit,  to  enable 
her  to  maintain,  pure  and  unimpaired,  that  which  has  never  yet  been 
shaken  or  sullied — her  public  credit  and  her  national  good  faith." 

This  is  a  sentence  which  might  challenge  the  world! 
Here  is,  in  a  small  compass,  almost  every  fault  that  writing 
can  have.  The  phrase  '■'■  conceal  from  themselves'''  is  an 
importation  from  France,  and  from  one  of  the  worst  manu- 
factories too.  What  is  national  "  honor "  but  national 
*^ character?'''  In  what  do  they  differ?  And  what  had 
^'^ independence"  to  do  in  a  case  where  the  subject  was  the 
means  of  paying  a  debt  ?     Here  are  three  things  named  as 


Speaker's  Speech.  289 

tlie  ^\first "  object  of  Englishmeu's  lieai'ts.  "^^1lich  was  the 
'■\first''  of  the  thi'ee?  Or  were  tbey  the  first  three?  To 
'■\feel  assured  "  is  another  French  phi'ase.  In  the  former 
part  of  the  sentence,  the  Pai'hament  are  a  they;  m  the 
latter  part  they  are  a  ^ve.  But  it  is  ihe  figures  of  rhetoric 
which  are  the  gi-eat  beauties  here.  First  it  is  Engllsh- 
r)ien  who  have  such  a  high  sense  of  honor  and  character 
and  independence.  Next  it  is  the  country.  And  next  the 
country  becomes  a  she;  and  in  her  character  of  female 
will  submit  to  any  '■'■jyressure''''  to  enable  her  to  '■'•main- 
tain'''' her  purity;  though  scarcely  anybody  but  the  sons 
of  Ai'chbishops  ever  talk  about  maintaining  purity,  most 
people  thinking  that,  in  such  a  case,  preserving  is  better. 
Hare,  however,  we  have  jyure  and  uninqyaired.  Now,  pure 
applies  to  things  Hable  to  receive  stains  and  adulterations; 
unimpaired,  to  things  Kable  to  be  undermined.,  dilapi- 
dated^ demolished,  or  worn  out.  So  the  Speaker,  in  order 
to  make  sure  of  his  mark,  takes  them  hotJi,  and  says  that 
the  thing  which  he  is  about  to  name,  "  has  never  yet  been 
shaken  or  sullied^\^  But  what  is  this  fine  thing  after  all? 
Gad!  there  are  two  things;  namely,  "public  credit  aiid 
national  good  faith."'  So  that,  leaving  the  word  good  to 
go  to  the  long  account  of  redundancy,  here  is  another 
instance  of  vulgarly-false  grammar;  for  the  two  nouns, 
joined  by  the  conjunction,  require  the  verb  have  instead 
of  has. 

10.  "Thus,  Sir,  I  have  endeavoi-ed,  shortly,  and  I  am  aware  how 
imperfectly,  to  notice  the  various  duties  wliicli  have  devolved  upon 
us,  in  one  of  tlie  longest  and  most  arduous  sessions  in  tlie  records 
of  Parliament." 

11.  "The  Bill,  Sir,  which  it  is  my  duty  to  present  to  your  Royal 
Highness,  is  entitled,  'An  Act  for  applying  certain  monicR  therein 
mentioned  for  the  Service  of  the  year  1819.  and  for  further  appro- 
priatmg  tlie  sup])lies  granted  in  this  Session  of  Parliament  '  To 
which,  with  all  iiumility,  we  pray  his  majesty's  royal  assent." 

Even  here,  in  these  common-place  sentences,  there  must 
be  something  stupidly  illiterate.     The  Speaker  does  not 


240  Six  Lesso)}s. 

mean  that  his  " endeavor  ■'  was  "  shortly  "  made,  or  made 
in  a  short  manner^  but  that  his  notice  was  made  in  a 
short  manner;  and,  therefore,  it  ought  to  have  been,  "^o 
notice  shortly."  ii  shortly  ii  must  be;  yet,  surely  phrase- 
ology less  grovelHng  might  have  been  used  on  such  an 
occasion.  '■'■In  the  longest  session,"  and  "  in  the  records 
of  Parliament,"  are  colloquial,  low  and  incorrect  into  the 
bargain;  and  as  for  "mow^es"  in  the  last  paragraph,  the 
very  sound  of  the  word  sends  the  mind  to  'Change  Alley, 
and  conjures  up  before  it  all  the  noisy  herd  of  Bulls  and 
Beai's. 

There  is,  indeed,  one  phrase  in  this  whole  Speech  (that 
in  which  the  Speaker  acknowledges  the  imperfectness  of 
the  manner  in  which  he  has  performed  his  task)  which 
would  receive  ovu*  approbation;  but  the  tenor  of  the 
speech,  the  at  once  flippant  and  pompous  tone  of  it,  the 
self-conceit  that  is  manifest  from  the  beginning  to  the  end, 
forbid  us  to  give  him  credit  for  sincerity  when  he  con- 
fesses his  deficiencies,  and  tell  us  that  the  confession  is 
one  of  those  clumsy  traps  so  often  used  with  the  hope  of 
catching  unmerited  applause. 


LESSON  II. 

JRemarks  on  the  /Sjjeech  ichlch  the  Prince  Regent  made  to 
the  Parliament  on  the  occasion  when  the  above  /Speech 
of  the  Speaker  teas  made. 

"My  Lords  and  Gentlemen: 

12.  '  It  IS  with  great  regret  that  I  am  again  obliged  to  announce 
to  you  the  continuance  of  his  Majesty's  lamented  indisposition. 

13.  "I  cannot  close  this  session  of  Parliament  without  expressing 
the  satisfaction  that  I  have  derived  from  the  zeal  and  assiduity 
with  which  you  have  applied  yourselves  to  the  s(!veral  important 
objects  which  have  come  under  your  consideration. 

14.  "Your  patient  and  laborious  investigation  of  the  state  of  the 


King's  Speech.  241 

drculation  and  currency  of  the  kingdom  demands  my  warmest 
acknowledgment;  and  I  entertain  a  confident  expectation  that  the 
measures  adopted,  as  the  result  of  tlm  iaqiUry,  will  be  productive 
of  the  most  beneficial  consequences." 

The  phrase  pointed  out  by  italics  in  the  12th  Paragraph 
is  ambiguous ;  and,  as  it  is  wholly  superfluous,  it  has  no 
business  there.  The  13th  Pai-agraph  (for  a  wonder!)  is 
free  from  fault ;  but,  in  the  14th,  why  does  the  king  make 
tico  of  the  "  circulation  and  currency  "  ?  He  means,  doubt- 
less, to  speak  of  the  thing,  or  things,  in  use  as  money. 
This  was  the  currency;  and  what,  then,  was  the  '■'■circu- 
lation "  ?  It  is  not  only  useless  to  employ  words  in  this 
way ;  it  is  a  great  deal  worse ;  for  it  creates  a  confusion 
of  ideas  in  the  mind  of  the  reader. 

'■''Investigation  and  inquiry''''  come  nearly  to  each  other 
in  meaning ;  but  when  the  word  "this,"  which  had  a  direct 
application  to  what  has  gone  before,  was  used,  the  word 
investigation  ought  to  have  followed  it,  and  not  the  word 
inquiry;  it  bemg  always  a  mark  of  great  affectation  and 
of  false  taste,  when  pains  are  taken  to  seek  for  synonymous 
words  in  order  to  avoid  a  repetition  of  sound.  The  devi;'e 
is  seen  through,  and  the  littleness  of  mind  exposed. 

Thejine  word  '•^adopted''''  is  not  nearly  so  good  as  the 
plain  word  taken  would  have  been.  The  Parliament  did 
not  adopt  the  measui-es  in  question ;  they  were  theu'  oicn  : 
of  their  own  invention ;  and,  if  I  were  here  writing  ro- 
marks  on  the  measui-es,  instead  of  remai'ks  on  the  lan- 
guage in  which  they  were  spoken  of,  we  might  have  a 
hearty  laugh  at  the  '■'■confident  expectation'''  which  the 
king  entertained  of  the  "  most  beneficial  consequences  "  of 
those  measures,  which  were  certainly  the  most  fooHsh 
and  mischievous  ever  taken  by  any  Parliament,  or  by  any 
legislative  assembly,  in  the  world. 

"Gentlemen  of  the  House  of  Commons: 

15.   "  1  thank  you  for  the  supplies  which  you  have  granted  for 
the  service  of  the  present  year. 
11 


242  Six  Ijessons. 

16.  "I  sincerely  regret  that  the  necessity  should  have  existed  of 
making  any  additions  to  the  burthens  of  the  people ;  but  I  antici- 
pate the  most  important  permanent  advantages  from  the  effort 
waich  you  have  thus  made  for  meeting  at  once  all  the  financial 
diflBculties  of  the  country ;  and  1  derive  mtich  satisfaction  from  the 
belief  that  the  means  which  you  have  devised  for  this  purpose  are 
calculated  to  press  as  lightly  on  all  classes  of  the  community  as 
could  be  expected  when  so  great  an  effort  was  to  be  made." 

Nobody,  I  presume,  but  kings  say  an  "  effort  /or  meet- 
ing." Others  say  that  they  make  an  effort  to  meet.  And 
nobody,  that  I  ever  heard  of  before,  except  bill-brokers, 
talks  about  meeting  money  demands.  One  cannot  help 
admii-ing  the  satisfaction,  nay,  the  '■'■much  satisfaction'''' 
that  the  king  derived  from  the  belief  that  the  new  taxes 
would  pi'ess  as  lightly  as  2)ossible  on  all  classes  of  the 
community.  I  do  not  like  to  call  this  vulgar  nonsense, 
because,  thoi^gh  written  by  the  ministers,  it  is  spoken  by 
tiie  king.  But,  what  is  it?  The  additional  load  viust 
fall  xipon  somebody;  upon  some  class  or  classes;  and 
where,  then,  was  the  sense  of  expressing  "  much  satisfac- 
tion^'' that  they  would  fall  hghtly  on  all  classes?  The 
words  '■'■  as  2yossible^''  which  come  after  likeh',  do  nothing 
more  than  make  an  addition  to  the  confusion  of  ideas. 

' '  My  Lords  and  Gentlemen  : 

17.  "I  continue  to  receive  from  foreign  powers  the  strongest 
assurances  of  their  friendly  disposition  towards  this  countr}-. 

18.  "I  have  observed  with  great  concern  the  attempts  which 
have  recently  been  made  in  some  of  the  manufacturing  districts  to 
take  advantage  of  circumstances  of  local  distress,  to  excite  a  spirit 
of  disaffection  to  the  institutions  and  government  of  the  country. 
No  object  can  be  nearer  my  heart  than  to  promote  the  welfare  and 
prosperity  of  all  classes  of  his  majesty's  subjects ;  but  this  cannot 
be  effected  without  the  maintenance  of  public  order  and  tran- 
quillity. 

18.  "You  may  rely,  therefore,  upon  my  firm  determination  to 
employ,  for  this  purpose,  the  powers  entrusted  to  me  by  law ;  and 
I  have  no  doubt  that,  on  your  return  to  your  several  counties,  you 
will  use  your  utmost  endeavors,  in  co-operating  with  the  magis- 


Khtg's  Speecli.  243 

traoy,  to  defeat  the  machinations  of  those  whose  7>r(yVcfe,  if  suc- 
cessful, could  only  aggravate  the  evils  which  it  professed  to  remedy; 
and  who,  under  the  pretence  of  Reform,  have  really  no  otlier  object 
hut  the  subversion  of  our  happy  Constitution." 

Weak  minds,  feeble  writers  and  sj)ealvers,  delight  in 
sxiperlatives.  They  have  big  sound  in  them,  and  give  the 
appearance  of  force;  but  they  very  often  betray  those 
who  use  them  into  absui'dities.  The  king,  as  m  Paragraph 
No.  17,  might  continue  to  receive  strong  assurances ;  but 
how  could  he  receive  "the  strongesf^  more  than  once? 

In  the  18th  Paragraph  we  have  "welfare  and  pros- 
perity." I,  for  my  part,  shall  be  content  with  either  (the 
two  being  the  same  thing),  and  if  I  find,  from  the  acts  of 
the  government,  reason  to  beheve  that  one  is  really  sought 
for,  I  shall  care  little  about  the  other. 

I  am,  however,  I  must  confess,  not  greatly  encoui'aged 
to  hope  for  this,  when  I  immediately  afterwards  hear  of  a 
"firm  determination  "  to  emjDloy  "powers,"'''  the  nature  of 
which  is  but  too  well  understood.  "Determination  "  can, 
in  grammar,  receive  no  additional  force  from  having  j?rwi 
placed  before  it ;  but,  in  poHtical  interpretation,  the  use 
of  this  word  cannot  fail  to  be  looked  uj)on  as  evincing  a 
little  more  of  ea-'jerness  than  one  could  wish  to  see  ap- 
parent in  such  a  case. 

In  these  speeches,  nouns,  verbs,  adjectives,  and  adverbs 
generally  go,  like  crows  and  ravens,  in  j)au"s.  Hence  we 
have,  in  the  18th  Paragraph,  "  the  institutions  and  ffov- 
ernment''''  of  the  country.  Now,  though  there  may  be 
institutions  of  the  country,  which  do  not  form  a  part  of 
its  government;  the  government  is,  at  any  rate,  am,ongst 
the  country's  institutions.  If  every  institution  do  not 
form  a  part  of  the  government,  the  government  certainly 
forms  a  pai't  of  the  institutions.  But  as  the  old  woman 
said  by  her  goose  and  gander,  these  words  have  been  a 
couple  for  so  many,  many  years,  that  it  would  be  a  siu  to 
part  them  just  at  the  last. 


244  Six  Lessons. 

The  gross  grammatical  errors  in  the  latter  part  of  the 
last  paragraph,  where  the  singular  pronoun  it  represents 
the  plural  noun  projects,  and  the  verb  profess  is  in  the 
past  instead  of  the  present  time,  one  can  account  for  only 
on  the  supposition  that  the  idea  of  Reform  had  scared  all 
the  powers  of  thought  from  the  minds  of  the  writers. 
This  unhappy  absence  of  intellect  seems  to  have  con- 
tinued to  the  end  of  the  piece;  for  here  we  have  "no 
other  object  hut^''  instead  of  no  other  object  than;  and 
the  word  "  really  "  put  into  the  mouth  of  a  king,  and  on 
such  an  occasion,  is  something  so  ■i^ery  low  that  we  can 
hardly  credit  our  eyes  when  we  behold  it. 


INTRODUCTION 

To  the  Four  Lessons  on  the  productions  of  Lord  Castle- 
reagh,  the  Luke  of  Wellington,  the  Marquis  Wellesleyy 
and  the  JBishop  of  Winchester. 

From  the  literary  productions  of  /Speakers  and  Minis- 
ters, I  come  to  those  of  Atnbassadors,  Secretaries  of  StatCy 
Viceroys,  and  JSishops.  In  these  persons,  even  more  fuUy 
perhaps  than  in  the  former,  we  are  entitled  to  expect 
proofs  of  gi-eat  capacity ,  as  writers.  I  shall  give  you 
specimens  from  the  writings  of  four  persons  of  this  de- 
scription, and  these  four,  men  who  have  been  intrusted 
with  the  management  of  affairs  as  important  as  any  that 
the  king  of  this  country  ever  had  to  commit  to  the  hands 
of  his  servants :  I  mean  Lord  Castlereagh,  the  Luke  of 
Wellington,  the  Marquis  Wellesley,  and  the  Bishop  of 
Winchester/  the  first  of  whom  has  been  called  the  greatest 
statesman,  the  second  the  greatest  captain,  the  third  the 
greatest  viceroy,  the  fourth  the  greatest  tutor,  of  the  age. 

The  passages  which  I  shall  first  select  from  the  wiitings 
of  these  persons  are  contained  in  state  papers  relating  to 
the  Museums  at  Paris. 


lutroductioti,  Etc.  245 

And  here,  in  order  that  you  may  be  better  able  to  judge 
of  the  writings  themselves,  I  ought  to  explain  to  you  the 
natxu'e  of  the  matters  to  which  they  relate,  and  the  cu-- 
cumstances  under  which  they  were  written.  The  Museums 
at  J^aris  contained,  in  the  year  1815,  when  the  King  of 
France  was  escorted  back  to  that  city  by  the  ai-mies  of 
the  Allies,  a  great  many  statues  and  pictures,  which  Na- 
poleon had,  in  his  divers  conquests  and  invasions,  taken 
from  the  collections  of  other  countries,  and  carried  to 
France.  "When,  therefore,  the  Alhes  had,  by  their  ai'mies, 
possession  of  Paris,  at  the  time  just  mentioned,  they  rifled 
these  Museums,  and  took  fi-om  them  what  had,  or  what 
they  asserted  had,  belonged  to  the  Allies  respectively. 
The  French  contended  that  this  was  unjust,  and  that  it 
was  an  act  of  pillage.  They  said,  that,  in  1814,  when  the 
AUies  were  also  in  possession  of  the  capital  of  France, 
they  put  forward  no  claim  to  the  things  in  question, 
which  were,  to  all  intents  and  purposes,  military  booty, 
or  prize;  and  that  for  the  Allies  to  make  this  claim  now, 
was  not  only  contraiy  to  their  own  precedent  of  1814, 
but  that  it  was  to  assume  the  character  of  enem,ies  of 
France,  directly  in  the  teeth  of  theu*  own  repeated  declai*- 
ations,  in  which  they  had  called  themselves  friends  and 
even  Allies  of  France;  and  in  direct  violation  of  their 
Bolemn  promises  to  commit  against  the  French  nation  no 
act  of  hostility,  and  to  treat  it,  in  all  respects,  as  a  friend. 
The  Allies  had  now,  however,  the  poicer  in  then-  hands ; 
and  the  result  was  the  stripping  of  the  Museums. 

To  characterize  this  act  committed  by  those  who  entered 
France  vmder  the  name  of  the  Allies  of  the  king  and  of 
the  great  body  of  his  people,  and  who  took  possession  of 
Paris  in  virtue  of  a  convention  which  stipulated  for  the 
security  of  all  jmblic  property;  to  -chai-acterize  such  an 
act  is  unnecessaiy ;  but  we  cannot  help  lamenting  that 
the  Ministers  of  England'  were  open  abettors,  if  not  orig- 
inal instigators,  in  this  memorable  transaction,  which,  of 


246  ^Si.r  Lessons. 

all  the  transactions  of  that  time,  seems  to  have  created 
the  greatest  portion  of  rancor  in  the  minds  of  the  people 
of  France. 

That  the  English  Ministers  were  the  instigators  appears 
pretty  cleai'ly  fi'om  the  seizure  (which  v.as  by  force  of 
xirms)  having  been  immediately  preceded  by  a  paper 
(called  a  note)  delivered  by  Lord  Castlereagh  in  the  name 
of  the  Prince  Kegent  to  the  Ambassadors  of  the  Alhes, 
which  paper  was  dated  11th  Sept.,  1815,  and  from  which 
paper  I  am  now  about  to  give  you  a  specimen  of  the 
writing  of  this  Secretary  of  State. 


LESSON  III. 

Remarks  on  Lord  CastlereagKs  Note  of  the  Wth  Sep- 
tember, 1815,  on  the  subject  of  the  3fuseum,s  at  Paris. 

This  Note  sets  out  by  saying,  that  representations,  on 
the  subject  of  the  Statues  and  Pictm-es,  have  been  laid 
before  the  Ambassadors  of  the  Alhes,  and  that  the  writer 
had  received  the  commands  of  the  Prince  Regent  to 
submit,  for  the  consideration  of  the  Allies,  that  which 
follows.  After  some  fui'ther  matter,  amongst  which  we 
find  this  "greatest  statesman"  tJ^^iing  of  "the  indulgen- 
cies  "  (instead  of  indulgences)  to  which  the  French  had  a 
right  "  to  aspire  "  (instead  of  to  hojye  for);  after  saying 
that  the  purity  of  the  friendship  of  the  Alhes  had  been 
"  proved  beyond  a  question  "  by  thek  last  year's  conduct, 
and  "  still  niore^'  that  is  to  say,  farther  than  beyond^  by 
then-  this  yeai-'s  conduct;  after  talking  about  the  '-'■  sub- 
stantial integrity  "  of  France,  and  thereby  meaning  that 
she  was  to  be  despoiled  of  only  a  part  of  her  dominions ; 
after  talking  about  "  combining  "  this  "  integrity  with  such 
an  adequate  system  of  temporary  precaution  as  may  sat- 
isfy what   the  Allies   o%oe  to  the  security  of  their   own 


Lord  Castlerea[)K s  Note.  247 

subjects;"  after  all  this,  and  a  great  deal  more  of  the 
same  description,  we  come  to  the  paragraphs  that  I  am 
now  going  to  remark  on.  Observe,  I  continue  the  num- 
bering of  the  paragraphs,  as  if  the  whole  of  the  papers  on 
which  I  am  commenting  formed  but  one  piece  of  writing. 

20.  "Upon  what  principle  can  France,  at  the  close  of  such  a 
war,  expect  to  sit  down  with  the  same  extent  of  possessions  which 
she  held  before  the  Revolution,  and  desire,  at  the  same  time,  to 
retain  the  ornamental  spoils  of  all  other  countries?  Is  it  that  there 
can  exist  a  doubt  of  the  issue  of  the  contest,  or  of  the  power  of  the 
Allies  to  effectuate  what  justice  and  policy  require?  If  not,  upon 
what  principle  deprive  France  of  her  late  territorial  acquisitions, 
and  preserve  to  her  tiie  spoliations  appertaining  to  those  territories 
which  all  modern  conquerors  have  invariably  respected,  as  insepar- 
able from  the  country  to  which  they  belonged? 

21.  "The  Allied  Sovereigns  have  perhaps  something  to  atone  for 
to  Europe,  in  consequence  of  the  course  pursued  by  them,  when 
at  Paris,  during  the  last  year.  It  is  true,  they  never  did  so  far 
make  themselves  parties  in  the  criminality  of  this  viass  of  plunder 
as  to  sanction  it  by  any  stipulation  in  their  treaties ;  such  a  recog- 
nition has  been  on  their  part  uniformly  refused  -.  but  they  certainly 
did  use  tlieir  influence  to  repress  at  that  moment  any  agitation  of 
their  claims,  in  the  hope  that  France,  not  less  subdued  by  their 
generosity  than  by  their  arms,  might  be  disposed  to  preserve 
inviolate  a  peace  which  had  been  studiously  framed  to  serve  as  a 
bond  of  reconciliation  between  the  nation  and  the  king.  They 
had  also  reason  to  expect  that  his  Majesty  would  be  advised  volun- 
tarily to  restore  a  considerable  proportion,  at  least,  of  these  spoils, 
to  their  lawful  owners. 

22.  ' '  But  the  question  is  a  very  different  one  now,  and  to  pursue 
the  same  course,  under  circumstances  so  essentially  altered,  would 
be,  in  the  judgment  of  the  Prince  Regent,  equally  unwise  towards 
France,  and  unjust  tawards  our  Allies,  who  have  a  direct  interest 
in  this  question. 

23.  "His  Royal  Highness,  in  stating  this  opinion,  feels  it  neces- 
sary to  guard  against  the  possibility  of  misrepresentation. 

24.  "Whilst  he  deems  it  to  be  the  duty  of  the  Allied  Sovereigns 
not  only  not  to  obstruct,  but  facilitate,  upon  the  present  occasion, 
the  return  of  these  objects  to  the  places  from  whence  they  were  torn, 
it  seems  not  less  consistent  with  tJieir  delicacy  not  to  suffer  the 
position  of  their  armies  in  France,  or  the  removal  of  tlie^e  works 


248  iSix  Lessons. 

from  the  Louvre,  to  become  the  means,  either  directly  or  indirectly, 
of  bringing  within  tfieir  own  dominions  a  single  article  which  did 
not  of  right,  at  the  period  of  tlieir  conquest,  belong  either  to  their 
respective  family  collections,  or  to  the  countries  over  which  they 
now  actually  reign. 

25.  ' '  Whatever  value  the  Prince  Regent  might  attach  to  such 
exquisite  specimens  of  the  fine  arts,  if  otherwise  acquired,  he  has 
no  wish  to  become,  possessed  of  them  at  the  expense  of  France,  or 
rather  of  the  countries  to  which  they  of  a  right  belong,  mo7'e  espe- 
cially/ by  following  up  a  principle  in  war  which  he  considers  as  a 
reproach  to  the  nation  by  which  it  has  been  adopted,  and  so  far 
from  wishing  to  take  advantage  of  the  occasion  to  purchase  from 
the  rightful  owners  any  articles  they  might,  from  pecuniary  con- 
Biderations,  be  disposed  to  part  with,  his  Royal  Highness  would,  on 
the  contrary,  be  disposed  rather  to  afford  the  means  of  replacing 
them  in  those  very  temples  and  galleries  of  which  they  were  so 
long  the  ornaments. 

26.  '■'Were  it  possible  that  his  Royal  Highness's  sentiments 
towards  the  person  and  cause  of  Louis  XVIII.  could  be  brought 
into  doubt,  or  that  the  position  of  his  Most  Christian  Majesty  was 
likely  to  be  injured  in  the  eyes  of  his  own  people,  the  Prince  Regent 
would  not  come  to  this  conclusion  without  the  most  painful  re- 
luctance ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  his  Royal  Highness  believes  that 
his  Majesty  will  rise  in  the  love  and  respect  of  his  own  subjects, 
in  proportion  as  he  separates  himself  from  these  remembrances  of 
revolutionarj'^  warfare.  These  spoils,  which  impede  a  moral  recon- 
ciliation between  France  and  the  countries  she  has  invaded,  are 
not  necessary  to  record  the  exploits  of  her  armies,  which,  notwith- 
standing the  cause  in  which  they  were  achieved,  must  ever  make 
the  arms  of  the  nation  respected  abroad.  But  whilst  these  objects 
remain  at  Paris,  constituting  as  it  were  the  title-deeds  of  the  coun- 
tries which  have  been  given  up,  the  sentiments  of  reuniting  these 
countries  again  to  France  will  never  be  altogether  extinct;  nor 
will  the  genius  of  the  French  people  ever  completely  associate  itself 
with  the  more  limited  existence  assigned  to  the  nation  under  the 
Bourbons." 

I  shall  say  nothing  of  the  logic  of  this  passage;  and 
I  would  fain  pass  over  the  real  and  poorly-disguised 
motive  of  the  proceeding;  but  this  must  strike  every 
observer. 

It  is  the  mere  writing,  which,  at  present,  is  to  be  the 


Lord  CastlereagWs  Note.  249 

principal  object  of  our  attention.  To  be  sui-e,  the  senti- 
ments, the  very  thoughts,  in  Paragraphs  24  and  25,  which 
speak  the  soul,  as  they  are  conveyed  in  the  language,  of 
the  sedentaiy  and  circumsj^ect  keej^er  of  a  huckster's 
stand,  or  the  more  stui'dy  perambulating  bearer  of  a  mis- 
cellaneous pack,  do,  with  voice  almost  imperious,  demand 
a  portion  of  our  notice ;  while,  with  equal  force,  a  similar 
claim  is  urged  by  the  suspicions  in  the  former  of  these 
pai-agraphs,  and  the  protestations  in  the  latter,  which 
present  to  the  nations  of  Eui'ope,  and  esi^ecially  to  the 
French  nation,  such  a  captivating  picture  of  English 
frankness  and  sincerity  ! 

But  let  us  come  to  the  loriting;  and  here,  in  Paragi-aph 
20,  we  have  spoliations  appertaining  to  territories,  though 
spoliation  means  the  act  of  despoiling,  and  never  does 
or  can  mean  the  thing  of  which  one  has  been  despoiled; 
and  next,  we  have  the  word  tohic/i,  relating  to  spoliation, 
and  then  the  subsequent  part  of  the  sentence  tells  us  that 
spoliations  have  invariably  been  respected. 

In  the  21st  Paragraph,  does  the  it  relate  to  criminahty 
or  to  mass  of  plruider?  and  what  is  meant  by  a  sanction 
given  to  either?  Could  the  writer  suppose  it  possible 
that  it  was  necessary  to  tell  the  Allies,  themselves,  that 
they  had  not  sanctioned  such  things?  And  here,  if  we 
may,  for  a  moment,  speak  of  the  logic  of  our  "  greatest 
statesman,"  the  Allies  did  sanction,  not  criminality,  not 
a  7nass  of  plunder,  but  the  quiet  p>ossession  of  the  speci- 
mens of  ai't,  by  leaving,  in  1814,  that  possession  as  they 
found  it.  At  the  close  of  this  paragraph,  we  have  a  pro- 
portion, instead  of  a  part,  an  error  common  enough  with 
country  fellows  when  they  begin  to  talk  fine,  but  one 
that  surely  ought  to  be  absent  from  the  most  stately  of 
the  productions  of  a  Secretary  of  State. 

"Unwise  towards  France,  and  unjust  towai-ds  the 
AlUes,"  and  '■'■equally'''  too,  is  as  pretty  a  specimen  of 
what  is  called  tioattle  as  you  will  find ;  while  "  the  return  " 
11* 


250  Six  Xessons. 

of  these  ^^  objects,''''  the  not  ptu'loining  of  a  *^  single  article," 
the  not  wishing  to  '■'•tahe  advantage''''  and  to  '-'•  purchase 
any  of  the  articles  that  the  owners  might  wish  to  part 
with^''  form  as  fine  an  instance  of  the  powers  of  the  plume 
de  crasse,  or  pen  of  mud,  as  you  will  be  able  to  hunt  out 
of  the  history  of  a  whole  year's  proceedings  at  the  PoUce 
Offices. 

But,  in  Paragraph  24,  we  have  '■'their  conquest."  The 
conquest  of  whom  or  what?  That  of  the  Allies,  that  of 
their  dominions,  or  that  of  the  "  objects  "  f  It  is  impossi- 
ble to  answer,  except  by  guess ;  but  it  comes  out,  at  any 
rate,  that  there  was  a  conquest;  and  this  "greatest 
statesman  "  might  have  perceived  that  this  one  word  was 
a  complete  answer  to  all  his  assertions  about  plunder  and 
spoHation ;  for  that  which  is  conquered  is  held  of  right; 
and  the  only  want  of  right  in  the  Allies,  forcibly  to  take 
these  "  articles,"  ai'ose  from  their  having  entered  France 
as  Allies  of  the  King  of  France,  and  not  as  enemies  and 
conquerers. 

And  what,  in  Paragraph  25,  is  meant  by  "-following  up 
a  principle  in  war^' ?  The  phi'ase,  "follow  up  a  prin- 
ciple," is  low  as  the  diit ;  it  is  chit-chat,  and  very  unfit  to 
be  used  in  a  writing  of  this  sort.  But,  as  to  the  sense ; 
how  could  the  regent,  even  if  he  had  pm'chased  the  pic- 
tures, be  said  to  folloio  tip  a  principle  "  in  loar  "  ?  The 
meaning,  doubtless,  was  that  the  regent  had  no  wish  to 
become  possessed  of  these  things  at  the  expense  of 
France,  or,  rather,  at  the  expense  of  the  countries 
to  which  they  belonged,  especially  as  he  could  not 
thus  gratify  his  taste  for  the  arts  without  acting 
upon  a  principle  which  the  French  had  acted  on  in 
war.  This  meaning  might,  indeed,  be  suj)posed  to  be 
contained  in  the  above  phrase  of  Lord  Castlereagh; 
but  in  a  writing  of  this  kind,  ought  anything  be  left  to 
supposition  ? 

The  26th  Paragi'aph  is  an  assemblage  of   all  that   is 


Lord  GastlereaglC s  Note.  251 

incorrect,  low,  and  ludicrous.  The  "  was  "  after  Christian 
Majesty  ought  to  be  could  he,  that  is,  ^'•were  it  possible 
that  his  position  coidd  he  likely  to  be  injured ; "  and  not 
'■^icere  it  possible  that  his  position  was  likely  to  be  in- 
jured," which  is  downright  nonsense.  And  then  only 
think  of  an  injured  positiofi/  and  of  the  king's  position 
being  injured  ^'i?i  the  eyes''"'  of  his  people!  "But,  on  the 
contrary.''''  On  the  contrary  of  what?  Look  back,  and 
■  see  if  it  be  possible  to  answer  this  question.  Next  comes 
the  intolerable  fustian  of  the  king's  ^^  separating  hhnself 
from  remenihrances; "  and  from  this  flight,  down  the 
"  greatest  statesman  "  pitches,  robs  the  attorney's  office, 
and  calls  the  statues  and  pictures  'Hitle  deeds,  as  it 
were;"  and  this  "as  it  tcere"  is,  perhaps,  the  choicest 
phrase  of  the  whole  passage.  But,  in  conclusion  (for  it  is 
time  to  have  done  with  it),  what  do  you  say  to  "  the  se?iti- 
tnents  of  re-uniting  the  countries  to  France"?  And 
what  do  you  say,  then,  to  the  "genius''''  (that  is,  the  dis- 
position) "  of  the  Fi'ench  people  associating  itself  with 
the  limited  existence  assigned  to  the  nation  under  the 
Bom'bons"?  What  do  you  say  of  the  man  who  could 
make  use  of  these  words,  when  his  meaning  was,  "  that, 
as  long  as  these  statues  and  pictiires  remained  to  remind 
the  French  people  of  the  late  extent  of  the  dominions  of 
France,  then*  minds  would  not  be  completely  reconciled 
to  those  more  narrow  limits,  which  had  now  been  pre- 
scribed to  her"?  What  do  you  say  of  the  man  who, 
having  this  j)lain  j^i'oposition  to  state,  could  talk  of  the 
genius  of  the  people  associating  itself  with  the  more  • 
limited  existence  of  the  nation,  the  nation  being  the  '■ 
people;  and  therefore  his  meaning,  if  there  can  be  any  ■ 
sense  in  the  words,  being,  that  the  people  as  a  nation  had, 
under  the  Bourbons,  had  their  existence,  or  length  of  life, 
abridged?  What  do  you  say,  what  can  you  say  of  such 
a  man,  but  that  natnre  might  have  made  him  for  a  valet, 
for  a  strolling  player,  and  possibly  for  an  auctioneer ;  but 


252  Six  Lessons. 

never  for  a  Secretary  of  State!     Yet  this  man  was  edu- 
cated at  the  University  of  Cambridge* 


LESSON  IV. 

Remarks  on  a  Dispatch  of  the  Duke  of  Welli^igton 
{called  the  greatest  Captain  of  the  age)  relative  to  the 
Museums  at  Paris. 

Having,  as  far  as  relates  to  the  Museums,  taken  a  sufiB.- 
cient  view  of  the  writing  of  the  greatest  States^nan  of  the 
age,  I  now  come  to  that  of  the  '■^greatest  Captain.''''  The 
writing  that  I  am  now  about  to  notice  relates  to  the  same 
subject.  The  Caj^tain  was  one  of  the  Commanders  at 
Paris,  at  the  time  above  spoken  of,  and  it  is  in  that  capa- 
city that  he  writes.  But  we  ought  to  observe,  here,  that 
he  is  not  only  a  great  Captain,  but  a  great  Ambassador 
also;  and  that  he  was  Ambassador  at  the  Congress  of 
Vienna  just  before  the  time  we  are  speaking  of;  and  that 
he  was  formerly  Secretary  of  State  for  Ireland. 

The  paper,  from  which  I  am  about  to  make  a  quotation, 
is  a  "  dispatch "  from  the  "  greatest  Captain  "  to  Lord 
Castlereagh,  dated  at  Paris,  23rd  September,  1815,  soon 
after  the  museums  had  been  rifled. 

I  shall  not  take  up  much  of  yotu*  time  with  the  per- 
formance of  this  gentleman ;  a  short  specimen  will  suffice ; 


*  This  Lesson  was  written  in  June,  1822.  On  the  12th  of  August, 
1822,  this  same  Lo>I  Castlereagh  (being  still  Secretary  of  State) 
killed  himself  at  North  Cray,  in  Kent,  by  cutting  his  throat.  A 
Coroner's  Jury  pronounced  him  to  have  been  insane;  and,  which  is 
very  cirrious,  a  letter  from  the  Duke  of  Wellington  was  produced  to 
prove  that  the  deceased  had  been  insane  for  some  time.  Though, 
mind,  he  had  been  for  some  time,  and  was  when  he  cut  his  throat, 
actually  entrusted  with  the  care  and  powers  of  the  two  other  Secre- 
taries' offices  (they  being  absent),  as  well  as  those  of  the  office  of 
Foreign  Affairs  J 


The  Duke  of  Wellington.  253 

and  that  shall  consist  of  the  first  three  paragraphs  of  his 
'■'■dispatch.'"'' 

"My  dear  Lord  : 

27.  "There  has  been  a  good  deal  of  discussion  here  hitely  respect- 
ing the  measures  which  I  have  been  under  the  necessity  of  adopt- 
ing, in  order  to  get  for  the  King  of  the  Netherlands  his  pictures, 
etc.,  from  the  museums;  and  lest  these  reports  should  reach  the 
Prince  Regent,  I  wish  to  trouble  you,  for  his  Royal  Highuess's  in- 
formation, witli  the  following  statement  of  what  has  passed. 

28.  ' '  Shortly  after  the  arrival  of  the  sovereigns  at  Paris,  the 
minister  of  the  Kiug  of  the  Netherlands  claimed  the  pictures,  etc., 
belonging  to  his  sovereign,  equally  with  those  of  other  poioers;  and, 
as  far  as  I  could  learn,  never  could  get  any  satisfactory  reply  from 
the  French  government.  After  several  conversations  with  me,  he 
addressed  your  lordship  an  official  note,  whioh  was  laid  before  the 
ministers  of  the  allied  sovereigns,  assembled  in  conference;  and 
the  subject  was  taken  into  consideration  repeatedly,  with  a  view 
to  discover  a  mode  of  doing  justice  to  the  claimants  of  the  speci- 
mens of  the  arts  in  the  museums,  without  injuring  the  feelings  of 
the  King  of  France.  In  the  meantime  the  Prussians  had  obtained 
from  his  majesty  not  only  all  the  really  Prussian  pictures,  but 
those  belonging  to  the  Prussian  territories  on  the  left  of  the  Rhine, 
and  the  pictures,  etc.,  belonging  to  all  the  allies  of  his  Prussian 
majesty;  andViie  subject  pressed  for  an  early  decision;  and  yonr 
lordship  wrote  your  note  of  the  11th  instant,  in  which  it  was  fully 
discussed. 

29.  "The  ministers  of  the  King  of  the  Netherlands  still  having 
no  satisfactory  answer  from  the  French  government,  appealed  to 
me,  as  the  general-in-chief  of  the  army  of  the  King  of  the  Nether- 
lands, to  know  whether  I  had  any  objection  to  employ  his  majesty's 
troops  to  obtain  possession  of  what  was  his  undoubted  property, 
I  referred  this  application  again  to  the  ministers  of  the  allied 
courts,  and  no  objection  liaving  been  stated.,  I  considered  it  my  duty 
to  take  the  necessary  measures  to  obtain  what  was  his  right." 

The  great  characteristic  of  this  writing  (if  writing  it 
ought  to  be  called)  is  the  thorough-paced  vulgarity  of  it. 
There  is  a  meanness  of  manner  as  well  as  of  expression, 
and,  indeed,  a  suitableness  to  the  subject  much  too 
natural  in  all  its  appearances,  to  have  been  the  effect 
of  art. 


254  Six  Lessons. 

The  writer,  though  addressing  a  minister  of  state,  and 
writing  matter  to  be  laid  before  a  sovereign,  begins  ex- 
actly in  the  manner  of  a  quidnvmc  talking  to  another  that 
he  has  just  met  in  the  street.  "  There  has  been  a  good 
deal  of  discussion,^''  (that  is  to  say,  talk)  '■'•heref  that  is 
to  say,  at  Pai'is,  Castlereagh  being,  at  the  time,  in  London. 
The  phrase  "to  get  for''''  is  so  very  dignified  that  it  could 
have  come  only  from  a  great  man,  and  could  have  been 
inspired  by  nothing  short  of  the  consciousness  of  being 
'■'■the  ally  of  all  the  nations  of  Europe,''''  as  the  writer 
calls  himself  in  another  part  of  this  famous  ^'■dispatch.'''' 

But  tohat  are  "  these  reports,""  of  which  the  great  Cap- 
tain speaks  in  the  latter  part  of  this  jDaragraph  ?  He  had 
spoken  of  no  reports  before.  He  had  mentioned  "cZ/s- 
eussion,^^  and  a  '•'•good  deaV  of  it;  but  had  said  not  a 
word  about  reports;  and  these  reports  pop  out  upon  us 
like  "■these  six  men  in  buckram,"  in  FalstalTs  narrative 
to  the  Prince. 

The  Captain's  "  wishing  to  trouble  "  Lord  Castlereagh, 
"  for  the  regent's  i)  if  or  mat  ion,''''  closes  this  paragraph  in 
a  very  suitable  manner,  and  prepares  the  mind  for  the 
next,  where  the  regent  would  find  trouble  enough,  if  he 
were  compelled  to  find  out  the  English  of  it.  The  Dutch 
minister  '■'■  claimed  ih.Q  pictures  belonging  to  his  sovereign, 
equally  with  those  of  other  powers.'"  What!  did  this 
Dutchman  claim  the  whole  :  those  belonging  to  the  Dutch 
sovereign  and  those  belonging  to  all  the  other  powers 
besides  ?  This,  to  be  sure,  would  have  been  in  the  true 
Dutch  style;  but  this  could  hardly  be  the  fact.  If  it 
were,  no  wonder  that  the  duke  had  learned  that  the 
minister  "newer  could  get  any  satisfactory  reply;"  for 
it  must  have  been  a  deal  indeed  that  would  have  satisfied 
him. 

The  jjhrase  "  he  addressed  your  lordship  an  official 
note  "  is  in  the  counting-house  style ;  and  then  to  say  to 
Lord  Castlereagh,  "  yoiu"  lordship  wrote  your  note  of  the 


The  Buke  of  Wellington.  255 

11th  of  September,"  was  so  necessary,  lest  the  latter 
shovild  imagine  that  somebody  else  had  written  the  note ! 
Nor  are  the  four  ands  m  this  paragraph  to  be  overlooked; 
for  never  was  this  poor  conjunction  so  worked  before, 
except,  perhaps,  in  some  narrative  of  a  little  girl  to  her 
mother. 

The  nan-ative  is,  in  the  last-quoted  pai-agraph,  continued 
with  uni-elaxed  spirit.  The  Dutch  minister  can  still  ob- 
tain no  satisfactory  answer ;  he  asks  the  duke  whether  he 
has  any  objection  to  use  force,  and  asserts,  at  the  same 
time,  that  the  goods  in  question  are  his  master's  ^^un- 
doubted property. '''  Upon  this  the  duke  applies  to  the 
other  ministers,  and,  "?io  objection  having  been  stated,^' 
he  considers  it  his  duty  to  obtain  ^'what  was  his  right/' 
that  is  to  say,  the  Dutch  king's  right. 

Never  was  there  sui'ely  a  parcel  of  words  before  put 
together  by  anybody  in  so  clumsy  a  manner.  In  a  sub- 
sequent part  of  the  "  dispatch,''^  we  have  this :  "  I  added, 
that  I  had  no  instructions  regarding  the  museum,  tior  no 
grounds  on  which  to  form  a  judgment."  In  another  place 
we  have  "the  King  of  the  Netherlands s  pictures."  In 
another  place  we  have  "that  the  property  should  be 
retui'ned  to  their  rightful  owners." 

But,  to  bestow  criticism  on  such  a  shocking  abuse  of 
letters  is  to  disgrace  it ;  and  nothing  can  apologize  for 
what  I  have  done  but  the  existence  of  a  general  knowl- 
edge of  the  fact  that  the  miserable  stuff  that  I  have 
quoted,  and  on  which  I  have  been  remarking,  proceeded 
from  the  pen  of  a  man  who  has,  on  many  occasions,  had 
some  of  the  most  important  of  the  nation's  affaus  com- 
mitted to  his  management.  There  is  in  the  nonsense  of 
Castlereagh  a  frivohty  and  a  foppery  that  give  it  a  sort 
of  liveliness,  and  that  now  and  then  ehcit  a  smile ;  but  in 
the  productions  of  his  corresj^ondent  there  is  nothing  to 
reheve ;  all  is  vulgar,  all  clumsy,  all  dull,  ail  torpid  inanity. 


256  Six  Lessons. 


LESSON  V. 

Remarks  on  a  Note  presented  by  Lord  Castlereagh  to  the 
Ambassadors  of  the  Allies,  at  Paris,  i?i  Jidy,  1815, 
relative  to  the  slave  trade. 

80.  "  VisooTTNT  Castlekeagh,  his  Britannic  Majesty's  principal 
Secretary  of  State,  etc. ,  in  reference  to  the  communication  he  has 
made  to  tlie  conference  of  the  orders  addressed  to  the  admiralty  to 
suspend  all  hostilities  against  the  coast  of  France,  observes,  that 
there  is  reason  to  foresee  that  French  ship-owners  might  be  induced 
to  renew  the  slave  trade,  under  the  supposition  of  the  'peremptory 
and  total  abolition  decreed  by  Napoleon  Bonaparte  having  ceased 
with  his  power;  that,  7ietiertheless,  great  and  powerful  considera- 
tions, arising  from  motives  of  humanity  and  even  regard  for  the 
king's  authority,  require  that  no  time  should  be  lost  to  maintain  in 
France  the  entire  and  immediate  abolition  of  the  trafSc  in  slaves  ,• 
that  if,  at  the  time  of  tlie  Treaty  of  Paris,  the  king's  administration 
could  wish  a  final  but  gradual  stop  should  be  put  to  this  trade,  in 
the  space  of  five  years,  for  the  puipose  of  affording  the  king  the 
gratification  of  having  consulted,  as  much  as  possible,  the  interests 
of  the  French  proprietors  in  the  colonies,  now,  that  the  absolute 
prohibition  has  been  ordained,  the  question  assumss  entirely  a  dif- 
ferent shape,  for  if  the  king  were  to  revoke  the  said  prohibition, 
he  would  give  himself  the  di.'iadvantage  of  authorizing ,  in  the  interior 
of  France,  the  reproach  which  more  than  once  has  been  thrown  out 
against  his  former  government,  of  countenancing  reactions,  and, 
at  the  same  time,  justifying,  out  of  France,  and  particularly  in 
England,  the  belief  of  a  systematic  opposition  to  liberal  ideas;  that 
accordingly  the  time  seems  to  hnve  arrived  when  the  Allies  cannot 
hesitate  formally  to  give  weight  in  France  to  the  immediate  and 
entire  prohibition  of  the  slave  trade,  a  prohibition,  the  necessity  of 
which  has  been  acknowledged,  in  principle,  in  the  transactions  of 
the  Congress  at  Vienna." 

Now,  I  put  this  question  to  you :  Do  you  understand 
what  this  great  statestnan  means  f  Read  the  note  three 
times  over,  and  then  say  whether  you  understand  what 
he  wants.  You  may  guess;  but  you  can  go  little  further. 
Here  is  a  whole  mass  of  grammatical  en-ors ;  but  it  is  the 


Ijord  CnstlereagKs  Note.  257 

obscurity,  the  imintelligibleness  of  the  note,  that  I  think 
constitutes  its  gi-eatest  fault.  One  way  of  proving  the 
badness  of  this  writing  is  to  express  the  meaning  of  the 
writer  in  a  clear  manner ;  thus : 

"Lord  Castlereagh  observes  that  thei*e  is  reason  to 
apprehend  that  the  French  ship-owners  may  be  induced 
to  renew  the  slave  trade,  from  a  supposition  that  the 
total  abolition,  recently  decreed  by  Napoleon,  has  been 
nullified  by  the  cessation  of  his  authority ;  that  motives 
of  humanity,  as  well  as  a  desire  to  promote  the  estabhsh- 
ment  of  the  kmg's  authority,  suggest  that  no  time  should 
be  lost  in  taking  eJ0&cient  measures  to  maintain  the  decree 
of  aboHtion ;  that  at  the  time  of  the  Treaty  of  Pai'is,  the 
king's  ministers  wished  to  abolish  this  trade,  but,  in  order 
that  the  king  might,  as  much  as  possible,  consult  the 
interests  of  the  colonial  proprietors,  those  ministers 
wished  the  object  to  be  accomplished  by  degrees  during 
the  space  of  five  yeai-s ;  that  now,  however,  when  the 
abolition  has  been  actually  decreed,  the  matter  assumes 
an  entirely  difi'erent  shape,  seeing  that  it  is  not  now  an 
aboHtion,  but  the  refraining  from  revoking  an  aboHtion, 
that  is  proposed  to  be  suggested  to  the  king ;  that,  if  the 
king  were  to  do  this,  he  would  warrant  amongst  his  own 
people  the  injurious  imputation,  more  than  once  brought 
against  his  former  government,  of  countenancing  the 
work  of  undoing  and  overturning,  and  would,  at  the  same 
time,  confirm  foreign  nations,  and  particulai-ly  the  EngHsh, 
in  the  beHef  that  he  had  adopted  a  systematic  opposition 
to  Hberal  principles  and  views ;  that,  therefore,  the  inter- 
ests of  the  king  not  less  than  those  of  humanity  seem  to 
call  upon  the  Allies  to  give,  formally  and  without  delay, 
the  weight  of  then*  influence  in  favor,  as  far  as  relates  to 
France,  of  an  enth-e  and  immediate  abolition  of  the  slave 
trade,  an  aboHtion,  the  necessity  of  which  has,  in  principle 
at  least,  been  acknowledged  in  the  ti'ansactions  of  the 
Congress  of  Vienna." 


258  Six  lessons. 

Now,  as  to  the  several  faulty  expressions  in  tlie  note  of 
Castlereagh,  tliough  I  have  made  great  use  of  italics,  I 
have  not  pointed  out  one-half  of  the  faults.  "Whoever 
before  heard  of  a  reason  to  foresee  a  thing  1  He  meant 
reason  to  believe  that  the  thing  would  take  place,  and  as 
it  v/as  a  thing  to  be  wished  not  to  take  place,  to  apprehend 
was  the  word ;  because  to  apprehend  means  to  think  of 
with  some  degi'ee  of  fear.  Wishing  to-moiTow  to  be  a 
fine  day,  what  would  you  think  of  me  if  I  were  to  say 
that  I  had  reason  to  foresee  that  it  would  rain?  The 
might  is  clearly  wrong.  If  the  abolition  were  total,  what 
had  peremptory/  to  do  there?  Could  it  be  more  than 
total  P  The  nevertheless  had  no  business  there.  He  was 
about  to  give  reasons  why  the  abolition  decree  ought  to 
be  confirmed ;  but  he  had  stated  no  reasons  given  by  any- 
body why  it  should  not.  To  lose  no  time  to  maintain; 
and  then  the  in  France,  and  then  the  immediate;  alto- 
gether there  is  such  a  mass  of  confusion  that  one  cannot 
describe  it.  "  To  maintain  in  France,''''  would  lead  one 
to  suppose  that  there  was,  or  had  been,  a  slave  trade  in 
France.  The  next  part,  beginning  with  "  that  «/","  sets 
all  criticism  at  defiance.  Look  at  the  verbs  could  wish, 
and  should  he!  Look  at  of  having.  Then  comes  prohi- 
bition for  abolition,  two  very  different  things.  To  assume 
entirely  a  different  shape  is  very  different  from  to  assume 
a7i  entirely  different  shape.  The  latter  is  meant  and  the 
former  is  said.  Then  what  does  the /or  do  there?  What 
consequence  is  he  coming  to?  How  was  he  going  to 
show  that  the  shape  was  different  ?  He  attempts  to  show 
no  such  thing;  but  falls  to  work  to  foretell  the  evils 
which  will  fall  on  the  liing  of  France  if  he  revoke  Na- 
poleon's decree.  And  here,  Goddess  of  Grub-street,  do 
hear  him  talking  of  the  King  of  France  giving  himself 
the  disadvantage  of  authorizing  reproaches!  If  the 
king's  conduct  would  justify  people  in  believing  ill  of 
him,  why  should  it  justify  the  English  in  particular? 


Lord  CastlereagKs  Note.  259 

They  might,  iudeed,  be  more  reaihj  to  believe  ill  of  him ; 
but  it  could  not  be  more  just  iu  them  than  in  othei-s. 
An  op2)osition  to  ideas  is  a  pretty  idea  enough ;  and  so 
i!5  the  giving  of  %ccight  in  France  to  an  immediate  pro- 
hibition ! 

Never  was  there,  sui-ely,  such  a  piece  of  writing  seen 
before !  Fifty  years  hence,  no  man  who  shauld  read  it 
would  be  able  to  ascertain  its  meaning.  I  am  able  to 
pick  it  out,  because,  and  only  because,  I  am  acquainted 
with  the  history  of  the  matter  treated  of.  And  yet,  most 
momentous  transactions,  transactions  involving  the  fate 
of  miUions  of  human  beings,  have  been  committed  to  the 
hands  of  this  man ! 

It  is  not  unnecessary  for  me  to  observe  that,  though  I 
have  stated  the  meaning  of  this  note  in  a  way  for  it  to  be 
understood,  I  by  no  means  think,  that  even  in  the  woi'ds 
iia  which  I  have  expressed  it,  it  was  a  proper  note  for  the 
occasion.  It  was  false  iu  professions;  and  it  was,  as 
towai'ds  the  King  of  France,  insolent  in  a  high  degree. 
Even  if  it  had  been  just  to  compel  the  king  to  abolish 
the  slave  trade,  the  matter  might  have  been  expressed  in 
a  less  offensiA-e  niamier ;  and,  at  any  rate,  he  might  have 
been  spared  the  brutal  taunt  that  we  meet  Avith  towards 
the  close  of  this  matchless  specimen  of  diplomatic  stu- 
pidity. 

Hoping  that  this  book  will  outlive  the  recollection  of 
the  transactions  treated  of  by  the  papers  on  which  I  have 
been  remarking,  it  seems  no  more  than  justice  to  the 
j^arties  to  say  that  the  abolition,  which  was  thus  extorted, 
had  eftect  but  for  a  very  short  time;  and  the  French 
nation  never  acknowledged  it  as  binding;  that  at  this 
moment  (June,  1822),  complaints  are  made  iu  the  House 
of  Commons  of  the  breach  of  agreement  on  the  part  of 
the  French ;  that  the  French  have  revived  and  do  carry 
on  the  traffic  in  African  slaves ;  that  our  ministers  promise 
to  make  remonstrance;  but  that  they  dare  not  talk  of 


260  Six  Lessons. 

war;  and  that  without  declaring  their  readiness  for  war, 
their  remonstrances  can  have  no  effect. 


LESSON    VI. 

RemarJcs  on  passages  in  Dispatches  from  the  Makqitis 
Wellesley,  Jjord  Lieutenant  of  Ireland,  to  Viscou?it 
Sid7nouth,  and  to  Mr.  Peel,  Secretaries  of  State;  dated 
Dublin  Castle,  from  3f?  January  to  12th  June,  1822; 
and  also  on  the  charge  of  the  Bishop  of  Winchester, 
delivered  in  Jxdy,  1822. 

31.  "Concluding  that  your  lordship  had  been  apprised,  before  my 
arrival  in  Dublin,  of  every  important  circumstance  respecting  the 
unhappy  disturbances  which  have  prevailed  in  this  country,  I  pro- 
ceed to  submit  to  you,  for  his  Majesty's  consideration,  such  informa- 
tion as  I  have  received  on  that  subject  during  the  few  days  that  I 
have  passed  since  my  succession  to  this  government. 

82.  * '  I  propose  to  arrange  this  information  with  reference  to  each 
county  respectively,  for  the  purpose  of  facilitating  a  comparison  with 
such  statements  as  may  already  be  in  your  lordship's  possession, 
and  of  enabling  you  to  form  a  judgment  of  the  relative  state  of  each 
particular  district  at  the  different  /periods  of  tim^  specified  in  each 
document." 

The  marquis's  style  is  not,  in  general,  low  and  clumsy/ 
it  has  the  opposite  faults,  affectation  and  foppishness; 
and  where  the  meaning  of  the  writer  is  obsciu'e,  it  is  not 
so  much  because  he  has  not  a  clear  head  as  because  he 
cannot  condescend  to  talk  in  the  language  and  manner  of 
common  mortals. 

'■'•Had  been  apprised  before  of  distui-bances  which  have 
prevailed"  presents  great  confusion  as  to  times.  We 
can  hardly  come  at  the  precise  meaning.  It  should  have 
been :  "  Concluding  that,  before  my  aiTival,  your  lordship 
was  apprised  of  every  important  circumstance  respecting 
the  unhappy  disturbances  prevailing  in  this  country." 
For  the  prevalence  was  still  in  existence.     To  submit  is 


Marquis  Wellesler/'s  Dispatches.  261 

to  place  at  the  disposal  of,  to  put  xmder  the  poioer  of; 
and,  tbei'efore,  transmit,  or  send,  was  the  proper  word; 
for  it  is  the  king  to  whom  the  information  is  sxibmitted. 
The  mai'quis  sent  the  information  to  Lord  Sidmouth  that 
he  might  submit  it  to  the  king. 

"/Successio?i  to  this  government "  is  a  strangely  pompous 
phrase  at  best.  But  it  is  not  correct ;  for  his  succession 
(if  it  were  one)  took  place  at  his  appointment;  and  he  is 
about  to  si^eak  of  what  he  has  learned  since  his  arrival 
in  Dublin ;  and  why  not  say  arrival? 

The  32d  paragraph  is,  perhaps,  as  complete  a  specimen  of 
smoothness  in  words  and  of  obscuiity  in  meaning  as  ever 
found  its  way  upon  paper ;  and  yet  this  was  an  occasion 
for  being  particularly  clear,  seeing  that  the  marquis  was 
here  explaining  the  plan  of  his  dispatch.  With  reference 
to,  means  in  relation  to,  as  appertaining  to,  having  a  vieto 
towards.  The  first  is  the  best  for  the  marquis :  and  that 
is  little  short  of  nonsense ;  for  what  is  arranging  infor- 
mation in  relation  to  each  county?  What  does  it  mean? 
Not  what  the  marquis  thought  he  was  saying,  which  was 
that  he  proposed  to  speak  of  the  state  of  all  the  counties, 
and  that  the  information  relating  to  each  counts/  he 
meant  to  place  under  a  separate  head.  This  was  what  he 
meant ;  but  this  he  does  not  say. 

And  then  again,  what  does  respectively  do  here  after 
each?  Respectively  means  particularly  or  relatively ; 
and  as  he  had  before  said,  or  meant  to  say,  that  he  pro- 
posed to  place  the  information  relating  to  each  county 
under  the  head  of  that  county,  what  need  was  there  of 
the  addition  of  this  long  and  noisy  adverb  ? 

To  be  sure,  to  place  the  information  under  separate 
heads,  each  head  confining  itself  to  the  information  relat- 
ing to  one  county,  was  a  very  good  way  of  facilitating  a 
comparison  of  this  information  with  that  which  was 
already  in  Lord  Sidmouth's  possession;  but  it  was  not 
onough   to   say    '■^facilitating  a  comparison   with   such 


262  >Slx  Lassoiis. 

statemeiits/''  and  there  appears,  besides,  to  be  no  reason 
to  conclude  that  the  information  before  possessed  was 
arranged  according  to  counties;  on  the  contrary,  the 
marquis's  laying  down  of  his  plan  would  induce  us 
to  suppose  that  the  arrangement  of  his  matter  was 
new. 

The  latter  part  of  the  sentence  is  all  confusion.  The 
marquis  means  that,  by  jolacuig  his  information  as  before 
described,  he  shall  enable  Lord  Sidmouth  to  form  a  judg- 
ment of  the  state  of  each  district,  7iotc,  compared  with 
the  state  in  which  it  was  at  the  date  of  the  former 
information.  The  '■'■relative  state  of  each  particular  dis- 
trict "  may  mean  its  state  at  one  period  compared  with  its 
state  at  another  period;  but  "at  different  periods  of 
time  "  by  no  means  gives  us  this  idea.  And,  even  if  it 
did,  what  are  we  to  do  -with  the  "  each  document "  at  the 
close?  Each  means  one  of  two,  one  of  more  than  one. 
So  that  here  we  have  the  relative  state  of  a  district  at  the 
different periodvS  of  time  speciued  in  one  document;  and 
the  main  point  that  the  marquis  was  diiving  at  was  to 
show  Lord  Sidmouth  the  manner  in  which  he  was  going 
to  enable  him  to  compare  the  contents  of  the  present 
document  with  those  of  the  documents  akeady  held  in 
his  possession. 

I  have  taken  here  the  first  two  sentences  of  the  dis- 
patch. They  are  a  fair  specimen  of  the  marquis's  style, 
the  gi'eat  characteristic  of  which  is  obscurity  arising  from 
affectation.  "What  he  meant  was  this:  "I  propose  to 
place  the  information  relating  to  each  county  under  a 
distinct  head,  for  the  pui-pose  of  facilitating  a  comjDarison 
of  this  information  with  that  which  yoiu'  lordship  may 
already  possess,  and  also  for  the  purpose  of  enabling  you 
to  form  a  judgment  of  the  present  state  of  each  county, 
compared  with  the  state  in  which  it  was  at  the  date  of 
former  dispatches."  And  would  it  not  have  been  better 
to  write  thus  than  to  put  upon  paper  a  parcel  of  words, 


Marquis  Wellesley's  Dispatches.  263 

the  meaning  of  which,  even  if  you  I'ead  them  a  hundred 
times  over,  must  still  remain  a  matter  of  uncertainty  ? 

But  there  is  another  fault  here;  and  that  is,  all  the 
latter  pai't  of  the  sentence  is  a  mere  redundancy ;  for  of 
what  was  Lord  Sidmouth  to  "fonn  a  judgment?^''  A 
judgment  of  the  comparative  state  of  the  country  at  the 
two  periods?  What  could  this  be  more  than  the  making 
of  the  compai'isou?  Judgment,  in  this  case,  means 
opinion;  and  if  the  marqms  had  said  that  his  object 
was  to  enable  Lord  Sidmouth  to  form  a  judgment  as  to 
what  ought  to  be  done,  for  instance,  h\  consequence  of  the 
change  in  the  state  of  the  country,  there  would  have  been 
some  sense  in  it ;  but  to  enable  him  to  see  the  change  was 
all  that  the  maa'quis  was  talking  about ;  and  the  very  act 
of  making  the  comparison  was  to  discern,  ox  judge  of,  the 
change. 

It  is  not  my  intention  to  swell  out  these  remarks,  or, 
with  this  dispatch  before  me,  I  could  go  on  to  a  great 
extent  indeed.  Some  few  passages  I  cannot,  however, 
refrain  from  just  pointing  out  to  you. 

33.  ' '  The  commanding  officer  at  Bantry  reports  a  daring  atto/ck 
made  a  few  nights  previously,  on  several  very  respectable  houses 
in  the  immediate  vicinity  of  tliat  town,  by  a  numerous  banditti,  who 
succeeded  in  obtaining  arms  from  many;  and  the  officer  stationed 
at  Skibbereen  states  Ms  opinion  that  the  sphit  of  disaffection,  which 
had  been  confined  to  the  northern  baronies  of  the  coimty,  had  spread 
in  an  alarming  measm-e  through  the  whole  of  West  Carbury;  that 
nightly  meetings  are  held  at  various  places  on  the  coast,  and  that 
bands  of  offenders  assemble,  consisting  of  not  less  than  three  hun- 
dred in  each  band. 

34.  "It  further  appears,  from  various  communications,  that  the 
greater  part  of  the  population  of  the  northern  part  of  the  county  of 
Cork  had  assembled  in  the  mountains,  and  that  they  have  in  some 
places  made  demonstrations  of  attack,  and  in  others  Jiave  committed 
outrages  by  day,  with  increased  force  and  boldness." 

^'■Reports  an  attack "  is  of  the  slang  military,  and 
should  not  have  forced  its  way  into  this  dispatch.  ^States 
his  opinion  that,"  is  httle  better.    But  it  is  to  the  strange 


264  Six  Lessons. 

confusion  in  the  times  of  the  verbs  that  I  here  wish  to 
direct  your  attention.  Tliis  is  a  fault  the  marquis  very 
frequently  commits. 

I  cannot  help  drawing  your  attention  to  "  a  numerous  banditti " 
and  "not  less  than  three  hundred  men."  Banditti  is  plural,  and 
therefore  the  a  ought  to  be  left  out.  Less  is  the  comparative  of 
little,  used  with  reference  to  quantity ;  but  tnen  are  not  a  quantity, 
but  a  number,  and  the  comparative  of  few,  which  is  fewer,  ought  to 
have  been  used  here. 

35.  "The  magistrates  resident  at  Dunmanaway  report  that  illegal 
oaths  have  for  a  long  time  been  administered  in  that  neighborhood; 
that  nocturnal  meetings  have  frequently  been  held;  that  in  the 
adjoining  parishes,  notices  of  an  inflammatory  description  have 
been  posted ;  and  in  one.  parish,  aims  have  been  taken  from  the 
peaceable  inhabitants. 

36.  "The  Rector  of reports,  on  the  10th,  that  six  houses  of 

his  parishioners  had  been  attacked  on  the  preceding  night,  and 
some  arms  obtained  from  them,  and  then  an  attempt  had  been 
made  to  assassinate  Captain  Bernard,  an  active  yeomanry  officer, 
when  only  a  short  distance  behind  his  corps,  but  that,  owing  to  the 
pistol  presented  at  him  missing  fire,  he  escaped,  and  his  brother 
shot  the  assailant." 

We  do  not  know  from  the  words  '■'■have  for  a  long  time 
been  administered,"  whether  the  oaths  were  administered 
a  long  time  ago,  or  are  now,  and  long  have  been  adminis- 
tering. The  that  should  have  been  repeated  between  the 
and  and  the  in  towards  the  close  of  paragraph  35 ;  for 
the  want  of  it  takes  the  last  fact  out  of  the  report  of  the 
magistrates,  and  makes  it  an  assertion  of  the  marquis. 
The  same  remark  applies  to  the  36th  i:)aragraph,  where, 
for  the  want  of  the  that  between  the  and  and  the  then,  it 
is  the  marquis,  and  not  the  rector,  who  asserts  the  fact 
of  an  attemj)t  to  assassinate  the  captain.  An  odd  sort  of 
an  attempt  to  assassinate,  by-the-bye,  seeing  that  it  was 
made  by  a  2^istol  ojjenlg presented  at  him,  and  that,  too, 
when  his  troop  was  just  on  before,  and  when  his  brother 
was  so  near  at  hand  as  to  be  able  to  shoot  the  assailafitf 
But  assassinate  is  become  a  fashionable  word  in  such  cases. 


Miirquis  Wellesley's  Dispatches.  265 

oT.  "On  the  evening  of  the  same  day  a  detachment  of  the  11th 
Regiment  was  attacked,  on  its  march  from  Macroom  to  Bandon, 
by  a  party  of  sixty  men,  who  followed  it  for  three  miles,  and  took 
advantage  of  the  inclosures  to  tire,  and  to  retard  the  march  of  the 
king^s  troops." 

The  meaning  is  that  the  party  of  sixty  men  followed  it 
(the  regiment),  took  advantage  of  the  inclosures  to  fire  on 
it,  and  to  retard  its  march ;  but  the  marquis,  from  a  de- 
sire to  write yi«e,  leaves  us  in  doubt  whether  the  regiment 
and  the  ktng''s  troo2:>s  be  the  same  body  of  men ;  and  this 
doubt  is,  indeed,  countenanced  by  the  almost  incredible 
cii'cumstance  that  a  regnlar  regiment  should  \>q  followed 
for  thi'ee  miles,  and  actually  have  its  march  retarded  by 
sixty  men  ! 

38.  "A  countryman's  house  is  also  stated  to  liave  been  attacked 
by  forty  men,  well  mounted  and  armed,  who  severely  beat  and 

wounded  him,  and  took  his  horse. reports  an  attack  on  the 

house  of  Mr.  Sweet,  near  Macroom,  who,  having  received  previous 
intimation  of  the  attack,  and  having  prepared  for  defence,  suc- 
ceeded in  repulsing  the  assailants,  about  two  hundred  in  number, 
with  a  loss  of  two  killed,  who  were  carried  off  by  their  associates, 
although  their  horses  were  secured." 

Here  we  have  reports  an  attacJc  again;  but  your  atten- 
tion is  called  to  the  latter  pai't  of  the  paragraph,  where 
it  would  appear  that  Mr.  Stoeet  sustaiaed  a  loss  of  two 
killed;  and  yet  these  two  dead  men  were  carried  off  by 
their  assailants.  If  the  marquis  had  stopped  at  the  word 
killed,  it  would  have  been  impossible  not  to  understand 
him  to  mean  that  Mr.  Sweet  had  two  of  his  men  killed. 

39.  "A  magistrate  communicates  that  information  had  been 
received  by  him  of  several  intended  attacks  upon  houses  in  that 
neighborhood,  but  that  they  had  been  prevented  by  tJie  judicious 
employment  of  the  police,  stationed  at  Sallans,  under  the  Peace 
Preservation  Act." 

By  emjyloying  the  police  in  a  judicious  manner,  the 
marquis  means ;  but  says  quite  another  thing. 
40    "The  police  magistrate  at  Westmeath  reports  the  setting  firs 
12 


266  Six  Tjessohs. 

to  a  farmer's  outhouses,  which,  togetlier  with  the  cattle  in  them, 
WAS  consumed." 

It  should  be  "  the  setting  of  fire ;"  and  it  should  be 
loere,  and  not  was;  for  the  deuce  is  in  it  if  orit-houses, 
together  with  the  cattle  in  thevi,  do  not  make  up  2,  plural. 

41.  "The  result  of  the  facts  stated  in  tliis  dispatch,  and  its  inelos- 
ures,  seems  Xo  justify  an  opinion  tliat,  although  no  material  change 
has  occurred  in  any  other  part  of  Ireland,  the  disturbances  in  the 
vicinity  of  Macroom  have  assumed  a  more  decided  aspect  of  general 
disorder,  and  accordingly  I  have  resorted  to  additional  measures  of 
precaution  and  military  operation." 

There  should  be  an  ioi  between  the  a7id  and  the  its. 
But,  it  is  not  the  result  of  the  facts  that  seems  to  justify 
the  opinion ;  it  is  the  facts  themselves  that  justify  the 
opinion,  and  the  opinion  is  the  result.  Measures  of 
military  operation,  too,  is  an  odd  sort  of  phrase.  This 
paragraph  is  all  bad,  from  beginning  to  end;  but  I  am 
merely  pointing  out  prominent  and  gross  errors. 

42.  ' '  Another  magistrate  reports  sevei-al  robbei'ies  of  arms  in  the 
parishes  of  Skull  and  Kilmore,  and  the  burning  of  a  corn-store  at 
Crookhaven;  and  another,  in  representing  the  alarming  state  of 
the  country,  adds,  that  the  object  of  the  insurgents,  in  one  district 
at  least,  has  not  been  confined  to  the  lowering  of  rents  and  tithes, 
but  extended  to  the  refusal  also  of  the  priests  dues." 

To  rob  applies  to  the  person  or  thing  from  whom  or 
which  something  is  violently  and  vmlawfully  taken.  Men 
rob  a  man  of  his  money,  or  a  house  of  its  goods ;  but  it 
is  not  the  money  and  goods  that  are  robbed.  Yet  this  is 
a  very  common  phrase  with  the  marquis,  Avho,  in  other 
places,  talks  of  ^^ plundering  axms  from  people,"  and  who, 
by  saying  '■^six  hundred  aiid  seventy-six  firearms^''  and 
the  hke,  leaves  us  clearly  to  understand  that  he  is  at 
liberty  to  use  this  noun  in  the  singular,  and,  of  covirse, 
to  say  a  fire-arm  whenever  ho  may  choose ;  a  liberty, 
however,  which  I  would,  my  dear  James,  earnestly  recom- 
mend to  you  never  to  think  of  taking. 


Marquis  Wellesley's  Dispatches.  267 

To  confine  and  extend  an  object  does  not  seem  to  be 
very  clear  sense ;  and,  at  any  rate,  to  say  that  the  object 
of  loicering  rents  and  tithes  has  been  extended  to  the 
refusal  also  of  the  priest's  dues  makes  sad  work  indeed. 
Without  the  also,  the  thing  might  pass ;  but  that  word 
makes  this  pai't  of  the  sentence  downright  nonsense. 

43.  ' '  No  additional  military  force,  no  improvement  nor  augmen- 
tation of  the  police,  would  now  be  effectual  without  the  aid  of  the 
Insurrection  Act ;  with  that  aid  it  appears  to  be  rational  to  expect 
that  tranquillity  may  be  maintained,  confirmed,  and  extended 
throughout  Ireland.  It  is,  therefore,  my  duty,  in  every  view,  to 
request  the  renewal  of  the  law,  of  which  the  operation  forms  the 
subject  of  this  dispatch." 

Did  any  man,  in  any  writing  of  any  sort,  ever  before 
meet  with  anything  hke  this?  Suppose  I  were  to  say, 
'■'■the  writings  of  tchich  the  inaccuracies  form  the  subject 
of  these  remarks,"  what  would  the  world  think  and  say  of 
me?     This  is  indeed  "prose  r^m  mad.''^ 

Cobbett  means,  of  course,  that  we  should  say,  "the  writings,  the 
inaccuracies  of  which  " ;  but  we  can  now  say,  ' '  the  writings  whose 
inaccuracies,"  which  sounds  much  more  smooth  and  elegant. 

44.  "With  respect  to  Westmeath,  the  chief  magistrate  of  police 
has  stated  the  revival  of  those  pai't^  feuds  and  personal  conflicts  in 
the  neighborhood  of  Mullingar,  which  are  considered  in  this  coun- 
try to  be  indications  of  the  return  of  public  tranquillity,  and  from 
which  the  magistrate  expects  the  detection  of  past  offences  against 
the  state." 

One  loses  sight  of  everything  about  language  here,  in 
contemplating  the  shocking,  the  horrible  fact !  For,  what 
is  so  horrible  as  the  fact  here  officially  stated,  that  party 
feuds  andpersotial  conflicts  are  deemed  indications/auor- 
able  to  the  government,  and  that  they  are  expected  by  the 
magistrate  to  lead  to  the  detection  of  past  offences  against 
the  state!  As  to  the  grammar:  to  "-state  the  revivaV  is 
just  as  good  Enghsh  as  it  would  be  to  say  that  the  magis- 
trate has  stated  the  fine  weather.  The  "  the  return  "  ought 
to  be  "a  return.'''' 


268  Six  Lessons. 

45.  "  The  early  expiration  of  the  Act  would,  at  least,  Mzard  the 
revival  of  that  tyranny ;  the  restraints  imposed  on  violence  have  not 
yet  been  of  sufficient  duration  to  form  any  solid  foundation  of  a 
better  and  more  disciplined  disposition  in  the  minds  of  the  people. 
Even  now  it  is  believed  that  arms  are  retained  in  the  hope  of  the 
expiration  of  the  law  on  the  1st  of  August;  and  although  a  more 
auspicious  sentiment  may  exist  in  the  hearts  of  some,  even  of  the 
guilty,  it  would  be  contrary  to  all  prudent  policy  and  provide7it  wis- 
dom, by  a  premature  relaxation  of  the  law,  to  afford  facility  to  the 
accomplishment  of  the  worst  designs,  and  to  weaken  the  protec- 
tions and  safeguards,  which  now  secure  the  lives  and  properties  of 
the  loyal  and  obedient,  before  the  spirit  of  outrage  had  been  effect- 
ually extinguished." 

"  To  hazard  the  revival  "  is  not  correct.  To  hazard  is 
to  expose  to  danger/  and  certainly  the  marquis  did  not 
mean  that  the  revival  of  the  tyranny  was  a  thing  that 
ought  not  to  be  ptit  in  danger.  The  word  hazard  had  no 
business  there.  Another  mode  of  expression  ought  to 
have  been  used;  such  as,  "exposed  the  country  to  the 
danger  of  the  revival  of  the  tyranny." 

The  semicolon  after  tyranny  ought  to  have  been  o,  full- 
point.  "  In  the  hope  of  the  expiration  "  is  bad  enough ; 
but  it  is  the  arrangement  of  this  sentence,  the  placing 
of  the  several  p>arts  of  it,  which  is  most  worthy  of  your 
attention,  and  which  ought  to  be  a  warning  to  every  one 
who  takes  pen  in  hand. 

^^ Prudent  policy  qx\.^  provident  wisdom  "  would  seem  to 
say  that  there  are  such  things  as  imprudent  pohcy  and 
improvident  wisdom ;  but,  still,  all  the  rest  is  inferior,  in 
point  of  importance,  to  the  confusion  which  follows,  and 
which  leaves  you  wholly  in  doubt  as  to  the  meaning  of 
the  writer.  Now,  observe  with  what  facihty  this  mass  of 
confusion  is  reduced  to  order,  and  that,  too,  without  add- 
ing to  or  taking  from  the  marquis  one  single  word.  I 
begin  after  the  word  wisdom:  "  to  afford,  by  a  prematiu'e 
relaxation  of  the  law,  facility  to  the  accompHshment  of 
the  worst  designs,  and  to  weaken,  before  the  spirit  of 
outrage  had  been  effectually  extinguished,  the  safeguards 


Bishop  of  Winchester's   Charge.  269 

which  now  secures  the  lives  and  properties  of  the  loyal 
and  obedient." 

How  clear  this  is  !  And  how  much  more  hai'monious 
and  more  elegant,  too,  than  the  sentence  of  the  marquis  ; 
and  yet  the  words  are  all  the  same  identical  words! 
Towards  the  close  of  Letter  XXI,  I  gave  you,  from  Dr. 
Johnson  and  Dr.  Watts,  some  striking  instances  of  the 
wrong  placing  of  words  in  sentences  ;  and,  lest  these 
should  be  insufficient  to  keep  so  great  a  man  as  tbe  mar- 
quis in  countenance,  I  will  here  show  that  a  bishop  can 
commit  errors  of  the  same  sort  and  greater  in  degree. 

Before  passing  to  the  bishop,  let  us  consider  for  a  moment  wherein 
lies  the  cause  or  the  mainspring  of  the  errors  committed  by  these 
high  personages.  It  is  plain  that  they  did  not,  to  recur  to  Mr. 
White's  phrase,  "  conform  to  the  laws  of  reason,"  nor  •'  follow  the 
order  which  we  call  logical."  Had  they,  then,  never  studied  logic? 
Undoubtedly  they  had ;  for  they  had  all  received  a  classical  educa- 
tion, and  logic  forms  a  chief  branch  of  such  an  education.  How 
came  they,  then,  to  think  and  write  illogically?  There  are  some 
people  who,  notwithstanding  their  study  of  logic,  cannot  think  or 
write  logically,  and  there  are  some  people  who,  without  ever 
having  studied  logic,  can  think  and  write  logically.  Of  the  latter 
the  number  is  small,  however.  For  grammar  is  a  branch  of  logic ; 
that  branch  of  logic  which  teaches  us  to  express  thought  clearly 
and  correctly ;  and  as  these  men  never  learned  or  mastered  this 
branch  of  logic,  they  were  never  able  to  express  their  thought 
clearly  and  correctly.  English  grammar,  by  itself,  they  probably 
never  studied ;  and  all  they  knew  of  it  was  derived  from  their 
study  of  Latin  grammar,  or  of  logic  in  general.  Lord 
Castlereagh  had  never  been  taught  to  see  the  proper  relations 
of  things,  and  like  Lord  Dundreary,  he  "got  things  mixed." 
When  the  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Commons  talks  of  the  necessity 
of  returning  to  Cash  Payments  as  soon  as  possible,  and  yet  appre- 
hends a  convulsion  from  a  too  rapid  transition,  that  is,  from 
returning  to  such  Payments  sooner  than  possible,  he  is  illogical  in 
thought ;  for  what  he  declares  in  one  breath  as  necessary,  he  fears 
as  dangerous  in  the  next.  And  when  Lord  Castlereagh  spoke 
of  the  Allies  making  themselves  "parties  in  the  criminality  of 
this  mass  of  plunder,"  he  spoke  about  as  logically  as  the  child  who 
complained  of  the  "  wicked  candy  that  made  him  sick." 

I  have  before  me  "  A  Charge  delivered  to  the  Clergy  of 


270  Six  Lessons. 

the  Diocese  of  Winchester,  at  a  primary  visitation  of 
that  diocese,  by  George  Tomline,  D.JD.,  J^ZH.S.,  Lord 
Bishop  of  Winchester,  I^relate  of  the  most  Noble  Order 
of  the  Garter.''''  We  will  not  stop  here  to  inquire  what  a 
prelate'' s  office  may  j-equire  of  him  relative  to  an  Order 
which  history  tells  us  arose  out  of  a  favorite  lady  drop- 
ping her  garter  at  a  dance;  but  I  must  observe  that,  as 
the  titles  here  stand,  it  would  appear  that  the  last  is 
deemed  the  most  honorable  and  of  most  importance  to  th-i 
clergy!  This  bishoj?,  whose  name  vms  Pkettyman,  was 
the  tutor  of  that  William  Pitt  who  was  called  the  heaven- 
born  minister,  and  a  history  of  whose  life  has  been  written 
by  this  bishop.  So  that  we  have  here,  a  Doctor  of  Di- 
vinity, a  Fellow  of  the  Royal  Society,  a  Prelate  of  the 
m,ost  Noble  Order  of  the  Garter,  and  a  Bishop  of  one  of 
the  richest  Sees  in  the  xohole  toorld,  who,  besides,  is  an 
Historian,  and  was  Tutor  to  a  heaven-born  minister.  Let 
us  see  then  what  sort  of  torlting  comes  from  such  a 
soui'ce.  I  could  take  an  incorr3ct  sentence,  I  could  even 
take  a  specimen  of  downright  nonsense,  from  almost  any 
page  of  the  Charge.  But  I  shall  content  myself  with  the 
very  Jirst  sentence  of  it. 

46.  "My  reverend  brethren,  being  called  to  preside  over  this 
distinguished  diocese,  at  a  late  period  of  life,  1  have  tliought  it 
incumbent  upon  me  not  to  delay  the  opportunity  of  becoming  per- 
sonally acquainted  with  my  clergy  longer  than  circumstances  ren- 
dered absolutely  necessary." 

There  are  t2co  double  meanings  in  this  short  sentence. 
AVas  he  called  at  some  foi-mer  time,  to  preside  over  the 
diocese  tchen  he  should  become  old?  or  was  he,  wheii  he 
Jiad  become  old,  called  to  preside  over  the  diocese?  But 
•what  follows  is  still  worse.  Does  he  mean  that  he  thought 
it  incumbent  on  him  to  become  acquainted  with  his  clergy 
as  soon  as  possible,  or  in  as  short  a  time  as  possible  f  To 
delay  an  opportunity  is  not  very  good ;  and  that  which  is 
of  a  man's  own  appointment,  and  which  proceeds  purely 


Bishop  of  Winche-^ter's   Charge.  271 

fi'om  his  own  wall,  cannot  strictly  be  called  an  opportuniiy. 
But  it  is  tlie  double  meaning,  occasioned  by  the  wrong- 
placing  of  the  words,  that  I  wish  you  to  attend  to. 

Now,  see  how  easily  the  sentence  might,  with  the  same 
words,  have  been  made  unequivocal,  clear,  and  elegant: 
"  My  Eeverend  Brethren,  being  called,  at  a  late  period  of 
hfe,  to  preside  over  this  distinguished  diocese,  I  have 
thought  it  incumbent  on  me  not  to  delay,  longer  than 
cu'cumstances  rendered  absolutely  necessary,  the  oppor- 
tunity of  becoming  personally  acquainted  with  my  clergy." 

How  easy  it  was  to  write  thus!  And  yet  this  bishoj) 
tlid  not  know  how  to  do  it.  I  dare  say  that  he  con-ected 
and  re-corrected  every  sentence  of  this  charge.  And  yet 
what  hungllng  work  it  is,  after  all!  And  these  are  youi" 
college  and  university  bred  men !  These  are  the  men  who 
aie  called  Doctors  on  accoimt  of  then"  literary  acquire- 
ments, doctus  being  the  Latin  word  for  learned!  Thus 
it  is  that  the  mass  of  mankind  have  been  imposed  upon 
by  hig  sounding  na^nes,  which,  however,  have  seldom 
failed  to  insui'e,  to  those  who  have  assumed  them,  power, 
ease,  luxiu-y,  and  splendor,  at  the  expense  of  those  who 
have  been  foohsh  or  base  enough  to  acquiesce,  or  to 
seem  to  acquiesce,  m.  the  fitness  of  the  assumption. 

Such  acquiescence  is  not,  however,  so  general  now-a- 
days  as  it  formerly  was ;  and  the  chagrin  v.^hich  the  "Z>oc- 
iors"  feel  at  the  change  is  not  more  evident  than  it  is 
amusing.  In  the  very  chai-ge  which  I  have  just  quoted, 
the  tutor  of  the  heaven-born  minister  says,  "A  sj^iiit  is 
still  manifest  amongst  us,  producing  an  impatience  of 
control,  a  reluctance  to  acknowledge  superiority^  and  an 
eagerness  to  call  in  question  the  expediency  of  established 
forms  and  customs^  "What!  is  it,  then,  a  sin;  is  it  an 
offence  against  God,  to  be  reluctant  to  '■'■acknowledge 
superiority  "  in  a  bishop  who  cannot  write  so  well  as  oui'- 
selves?  Oh,  no!  We  are  not  to  be  censvu-ed,  because 
we  doubt  of  the  expediency  of  those  estabhshments,  those 


272  Six  Wessons. 

colleges  and  universities,  which  cause  immense  revenues, 
arising  from  public  property,  to  be  expended  on  the  edu- 
cation of  men,  who,  after  all,  can  produce,  ia  the  literary 
way,  nothing  better  than  writings  such  as  those  on  which 
we  have  now  been  remarking. 

The  nature  of  the  faults  in  these  extracts  may,  perhaps,  be  made 
still  clearer  by  calling  your  attention  to  the  two  kinds  of  sentences 
called  loose  and  periodic.  A  loose  sentence  is  one  in  which  the 
sense  is  complete  at  the  end  of  any  phrase  or  clause  in  it,  whereas 
a  periodic  sentence  keeps  the  sense  suspended  till  the  end.  The 
latter  is  generally  preferable  to  the  former.  For  instance.  "We 
have  learned  to  speak  and  write  English  correctly,  in  a  few  months, 
by  means  of  this  little  book,  in  spite  of  many  obstacles."  This  is  a 
loose  sentence ;  so  loose  that  any  member  of  it  may  be  dropped 
without  injuring  the  sense.  Now  let  us  put  it  in  a  periodic  form, 
and  yon  will  see  that  you  can  come  to  a  full-stop  nowhere  except 
at  the  end.  "By  means  of  this  little  book,  we  have,  in  a  few 
months,  in  spite  of  many  obstacles,  learned  to  speak  and  wtivo 
English  correctly." 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


JUN  5      V-6% 
I  3  \^& 


f^AlN  LOAN  oiik 

E:^  FEB  ll)196S 


I  A.M. 


RECEl 


LD-IRL 


^  MAY  ii3 Idee 


(& 


\ 


^M. 


VE 


Dl 


2    1979 


IVIMI    ^ 


i  1965 


ij.Mkjy?/|fp^^,.,,PiiL 


SEP 


EWAl 


L  V 


ft^lA 


]m 


ORION 

to/ URL  OCT  20  '88 

LD/URL 

KEC'D  LD-URE 

DEC  2  71989 
JAN  0  4  iQ^n 


Form  L9-25w-9,'47(A5618) 444 


UNIVERSITY  of  CALIFORNIA 

AT 

T  nc  A  TNjnFT  R<; 


001  352  492 


UCLAYoung  Research   Library 

PE1111    .C63e  1901 


L  009  508  719  3 


SOUTHERN  RPGfnL°,'?''"°'-"« 


rnia 


